-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 208
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
V18 Upgrade Migrations #1084
V18 Upgrade Migrations #1084
Conversation
…pgrade-migrations
x/stakeibc/keeper/unbonding_records_get_host_zone_unbondings_msgs_test.go
Show resolved
Hide resolved
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.
The logic looks sound. My main comment is that we should add more unit testing as this is quite a sensitive 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.
Overall looks good - need to review in detail again tomorrow. +1 to Riley's comment - should we add more detailed unittests?
5d26eb8
to
a1773ab
Compare
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.
thanks for taking this - it looked like a tedious one!
Co-authored-by: sampocs <sam@stridelabs.co>
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.
Looks good to me Sam! One small comment on updating the HZU but otherwise beautiful
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.
This is looking good, should we also unittest test the upgrade itself? Can also happen in a different PR / someone else could grab it!
NativeTokenAmount: initialNativeAmount2, | ||
}) | ||
|
||
// Create epoch unbonding records |
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.
Should we test records in other statuses?
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.
was considering that too, but didn't want the test to get too bloated.
Happy to add it in the morn if you think it makes sense!
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.
Maybe just one other status to make sure the record filtering works
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.
done
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.
Unit test looks beautiful!
Co-authored-by: sampocs <sam.pochyly@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Riley Edmunds <riley@stridelabs.co>
…e into v18-upgrade-migrations
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.
re-reviewed with fresh eyes: i'm signed off.
This reverts commit 2f2f290.
…e into v18-upgrade-migrations
Migrates User Redemption Records to new format in v18 upgrade
Note: we should test this twice with LocalStride. First, with a slightly stale cache, so we can more accurately gauge what will happen at upgrade time. Second, with the most recent mainnet state (as part of the standard localstride flow).
TODO: Add Unit Tests