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

fix: allow same creation block to be used on by-hash aex9 balances #1697

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Mar 14, 2024

Conversation

sborrazas
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@sborrazas sborrazas self-assigned this Mar 11, 2024
Copy link
Collaborator

@thepiwo thepiwo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

not 100% sure how that works

@sborrazas
Copy link
Contributor Author

@thepiwo issue was aex9 contract balances where you can specify a block hash to get the balances of that specific block. Endpoint worked fine, but there was a validation where you were only able to specify a block created AFTER the contract was created, but couldn't use the SAME block. This change allows you to get the balances from the block in which it was first created.

E.g. the contract balances for the block in which it was created returns 404
https://testnet.aeternity.io/mdw/aex9/balances/hash/mh_2gTPvRatcckf7vr4DYAKW8az2eqKiDoiojdY11HEUqYcYzs8V7/ct_2ZjEWgr4BaLrqEHwRvgWwp4E834xnsknJ1HxSnCkdsHH2Mm5No
But returns 200 for the block right after that one:
https://testnet.aeternity.io/mdw/aex9/balances/hash/mh_cVa23fThaJctihX1NCqcuoBSdMcFjEaU7YvDVy9FQAfpycifo/ct_2ZjEWgr4BaLrqEHwRvgWwp4E834xnsknJ1HxSnCkdsHH2Mm5No

This is going to be improved anyway (pagination added) on a V3 endpoint

@sborrazas sborrazas merged commit 797b1ef into master Mar 14, 2024
6 of 7 checks passed
@sborrazas sborrazas deleted the aex9-v1-create-validation branch March 14, 2024 14:13
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.

None yet

2 participants