Skip to content

feat: Enable storage map querying#598

Merged
igamigo merged 3 commits intonextfrom
igamigo-map-proof
Jan 13, 2025
Merged

feat: Enable storage map querying#598
igamigo merged 3 commits intonextfrom
igamigo-map-proof

Conversation

@igamigo
Copy link
Collaborator

@igamigo igamigo commented Dec 23, 2024

Closes #596

@bobbinth bobbinth added no changelog This PR does not require an entry in the `CHANGELOG.md` file and removed no changelog This PR does not require an entry in the `CHANGELOG.md` file labels Dec 24, 2024
@igamigo igamigo force-pushed the igamigo-map-proof branch 3 times, most recently from 8a2ed6a to c2ec0c2 Compare December 30, 2024 15:29
@igamigo igamigo requested review from Mirko-von-Leipzig and bobbinth and removed request for bobbinth December 30, 2024 15:29
@igamigo igamigo marked this pull request as ready for review December 30, 2024 15:29
@igamigo igamigo requested a review from bobbinth December 30, 2024 16:52
@igamigo igamigo force-pushed the igamigo-map-proof branch from 363acf2 to acee4bc Compare January 2, 2025 18:41
Copy link
Contributor

@tomyrd tomyrd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good! Left one small question, I don't see it as a blocker though, just curious.

Copy link
Contributor

@bobbinth bobbinth left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good! Thank you! I left a few small comments inline. Once these are addressed we can merge.

As I mentioned in one of the comments, this approach is fine for now, but we should refactor both how we store public account data and how we provide the data to the client.

.find(|info| info.summary.account_id == request.account_id)
.expect("retrieved accounts were validated against request");

if let Some(details) = &account_info.details {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not for this PR: this approach works fine for now, but it won't work with large accounts (i.e., we are loading the full account state into memory and then selecting key-value pairs from it).

Copy link
Contributor

@bobbinth bobbinth left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good! Thank you!

…instead of retreived accounts; README suggestions
@igamigo igamigo merged commit f9da75e into next Jan 13, 2025
2 checks passed
@igamigo igamigo deleted the igamigo-map-proof branch January 13, 2025 19:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants