-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 135
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat : update liblog to use SDKv0.50.0 #1043
Conversation
Background After more investigation, it's become apparent that there are transactions which are being rejected in the CometBFT mempool, I don't think they ever reach the app mempool. The reason for the rejection is the account sequence mismatch. Theoretically, this should be verified when submitting a transaction. Looking at the code, there is a precondition in our ante handler for signature verification that's being skipped if we're running CheckTX - so it's possible for a transaction that would actually fail to still be included in the mempool, as it looks like the check is only run once the TX is actually executed. Tested this in public test net against a dev build and had promising results, meaning most TXs got rejected and evicted during the CheckTX stage. However, 6 transactions remain to be stuck. I'm not entirely sure why. It's possible they're being re-broadcasted from the other nodes. Once all validators upgrade to the next version with this change in place, we will know.
@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ func NewVerifyAuthorisedSignatureDecorator(fk types.FeegrantKeeper) VerifyAuthor | |||
// AnteHandle verifies that the message is signed by at least one signature that has | |||
// active fee grant from the creator address, IF the message contains metadata. | |||
func (d VerifyAuthorisedSignatureDecorator) AnteHandle(ctx sdk.Context, tx sdk.Tx, simulate bool, next sdk.AnteHandler) (sdk.Context, error) { | |||
if simulate || ctx.IsCheckTx() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why this change?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@aleem1314 sorry as i made a mistake by raising a pr to master branch and then changing it to v.50 upgrade branch this commit got pulled into this pr.
No description provided.