Backend- Improper updation of Txn Count and Chaincodes list #411
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What this PR does / why we need it:
Backend - Issue in updating the Txn count w.r.t mutiple versions of the same chaincode and issue in fetching the chaincodes list w.r.t to other channel.
Considerations:
Tested with Hyperledger Fabric Version 2.2 and 2.4.7
No of Channels -2
channel Name:"mychannelb" In this channel the deployed chaincode name is "basic" and with versions 1 and 2. The other deployed chaincode is "auction" with version 1.
channel name: "channel2" In this channel the deployed chaincode name is "auction" - version 1.
Issue#1: When we invoke a Txn, the Txn count is incrementing by one in all the available versions of the same chaincode.
Isse#2: Issue in fetching the list of chaincodes when there are multiple channels.
The chaincode installed in channel2 is only "auction" but it is picking even the "basic- V2" chaincode which is installed in channel - mychannelb.
Expected Correct Behaviour:
The correct Txn count w.r.t chaincode version.
Fetch the correct list of chaincodes installed with specific to channels.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #408
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation, usage docs, etc.: