Skip to content
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

add block_hash to token_transfers #2872

Merged

Conversation

ayrat555
Copy link
Contributor

Part of #2865

This PR adds block_hash to token_transfers table and adds it to a composite primary key. That's how we can get rid of heavy token_transfers removal operation during blocks import.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Nov 23, 2019

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build d78d4d4c-b66a-4667-b6c4-0bb3179d3bf6

  • 5 of 5 (100.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 3 files are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage increased (+0.2%) to 77.079%

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build a221a95b-d214-4fbf-b1f3-b4e399555dc2: 0.2%
Covered Lines: 5340
Relevant Lines: 6928

💛 - Coveralls

@ayrat555 ayrat555 force-pushed the ab-do-not-remove-nonconsensus-token-transfers branch from 254fe2f to c1bb8da Compare November 26, 2019 13:06
@ayrat555 ayrat555 force-pushed the ab-do-not-remove-nonconsensus-token-transfers branch from c1bb8da to 9ac231b Compare November 26, 2019 13:16
Copy link
Member

@vbaranov vbaranov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@ayrat555 please fix merging conflicts

@vbaranov vbaranov self-requested a review November 27, 2019 15:59
@vbaranov vbaranov merged commit ed040bc into pp-pending-block-ops Nov 27, 2019
@vbaranov vbaranov deleted the ab-do-not-remove-nonconsensus-token-transfers branch November 27, 2019 15:59
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.

3 participants