-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 592
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
[CL]: Export Position_lock_id mappings to GenesisState #4912
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
2141355
added wrapper
stackman27 e376a98
improved test
stackman27 8f4ae55
roman comments
stackman27 bb4e0f5
nits
stackman27 d4c3df6
romans feedback
stackman27 d1fb08a
added changelog
stackman27 2a3601b
Merge branch 'main' into sis/genesis-map
stackman27 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
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.
So, it seems like the only reason we need to do this is because lock_id is the only externally linked data in all of the KVStore pairs. Maybe it makes sense for us to include underlying lock ID in the position struct after all...
Thoughts @p0mvn ? Just feels odd to make a new proto that links these two when it could just exist in the position struct itself. Not a huge deal tho
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 did we remove it from the second index in the first place? Was it the fact that some position IDs don't have a lock id associated with them? If that's the case, I think the current approach is better.
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.
I removed it from the denom because of the complexity it introduced when attempting to create intermediary accounts with the base denom rather than the full denom (it would try and gather all locks with the base denom rather the full one). Also, removing it reduced much of the custom lock logic that was added previously
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.
will proceed with current approach and we can change anything that comes up in the future