Show collided transactions in Explorer

[telezhnaya]

We have a sad story with transaction hash collisions both on mainnet and testnet near/near-indexer-for-explorer#84

We created the fix on Indexer side, now we are collecting collided transactions. One of the new transaction hashes is in the mainnet DB, its hash:

AUh97Kbbg962AfqnQTnmM7tSSy5rnczZ99xXNjAxkctL_issue84_35056813

But it's not possible to look at it on Explorer: https://explorer.near.org/transactions/AUh97Kbbg962AfqnQTnmM7tSSy5rnczZ99xXNjAxkctL_issue84_35056813 It is stored at block 35056813, it's not shown in the block info either.

All the collided hashes will have such format. We need to support these transactions.

[frol]

@shelegdmitriy well, there is no way to query the collided transaction via RPC yet, so there is no way to have a proper Transaction Details page before we actually expose the API to query it from nearcore (not any time soon, I believe), but let's at least see if we can do anything on the Block Details page since I would expect to see the transaction there: https://explorer.near.org/blocks/6Z5iLBjHzXZUsuC6iDTthXw2AYe32AmnbowKNgPtRJK9

[frol]

Account Details page does not show the transaction either: https://explorer.near.org/accounts/9807f85f65c59573d247ba3ef9a3fb3a7ff1cd5c33a851237c337127b486ecfb.

@shelegdmitriy Before you fix the issue, please, write your findings as to why Explorer does not get the transaction listed (maybe we will decide not to fix it right now and instead wait for Activities list that will change the way we query the data in the first place)

[shelegdmitriy]

@frol ok, I'll take a look

[shelegdmitriy]

Well, we still can show some transaction details. For now we collect all the data about transaction from two queries:

1. from indexer (we receive signerId, receiverId, blockHash, blockTimestamp) (and those data also awailable for collided transaction);
2. from rpc (we receive transaction_outcome, receipt, receipt_outcome and collect all receipts) (and this query actually fails for collided transaction);

So my first steps which I try:

1. query for transactionInfo from indexer (success);
2. check if thansaction is colleted (if query form indexer proceed I find substring "issue84" in transactionHash);
3. if transaction is collided then I skip query to rpc and return transactionInfo as is

And here is what we actually could see:

Next step is to clarify how we can display this transaction on the BlockDetails page in fact that we need a list of actions for it

@frol @telezhnaya

[shelegdmitriy]

About transactionActions we can query for them from indexer transaction_actions table but for this transaction it returns nothing. So for now I don't know how we can display it on BlockDetails page. @frol @telezhnaya any thoughts?

[telezhnaya]

I haven't read the implementation, maybe my idea is hard to achieve.
Is it possible to get the information and, in case of success, just show it?
The reasons of failure can be different. In any case, it's better to try to collect the info from the different sources and show everything that we can.
I don't like the idea with "if hash contains issue84". We have the hash containing issue
https://explorer.near.org/transactions/2LissueAY6kkb2Fjk5i1MmCw5dC4ZqbaDKNQwXBox681
It's a matter of time when we meet issue84
And the code with such ifs is hard to read and maintain

[telezhnaya]

I suggest not to use transaction_actions table, we have an issue about removing it
near/near-indexer-for-explorer#176

[shelegdmitriy]

I haven't read the implementation, maybe my idea is hard to achieve.

Is it possible to get the information and, in case of success, just show it?

The reasons of failure can be different. In any case, it's better to try to collect the info from the different sources and show everything that we can.

I don't like the idea with "if hash contains issue84". We have the hash containing issue

https://explorer.near.org/transactions/2LissueAY6kkb2Fjk5i1MmCw5dC4ZqbaDKNQwXBox681

It's a matter of time when we meet issue84

And the code with such ifs is hard to read and maintain

Ok, so "issue84" is not required for those transactions. Let me think about it ones again

[shelegdmitriy]

I suggest not to use transaction_actions table, we have an issue about removing it

near/near-indexer-for-explorer#176

I just suggested that we can use it but it doesn't make any sense

[shelegdmitriy]

@telezhnaya we can do as you said. I just need to make some fix. But still I can't get how we'll show this transaction on the BlockDetails page.

[telezhnaya]

@shelegdmitriy
We use transaction_actions table for BlockDetails page, right? Is that an only problem?
Can you check whether it's possible to get rid of this usage? We anyway need to do that for near/near-indexer-for-explorer#176 in one day

[shelegdmitriy]

@shelegdmitriy

We use transaction_actions table for BlockDetails page, right? Is that an only problem?

Can you check whether it's possible to get rid of this usage? We anyway need to do that for near/near-indexer-for-explorer#176 in one day

No, we don't use transaction_actions at all. We query for transactionStatus and transactionActions from rpc. So if there is no transactionActions we can't display it on BlockDetails page

[telezhnaya]

Oh, I see. It's better to hear @frol opinion here.

Created the issue about missing entries in transaction_actions: near/near-indexer-for-explorer#214.

[shelegdmitriy]

I discussed this with @frol and we decided to leave it as is because of several points:

1. we can't resolve this issue fully because a lot of stuff we collect from rpc and there is no way to get it in another way;
2. It's still a rare case so there will be very small amount of such transactions;
3. the interpretation of transactions will change with new design.
   So there is no actions here
   @telezhnaya

[shelegdmitriy]

I guess we can close this issue as we have the new interpretation of account details page