Warrants pt 2 - Allow multiple sys validation dependencies #3861
Conversation
Co-authored-by: David Braden <neonphog@gmail.com>
* Fix benchmark errors * holochain_state passes * About to do some global find-replace * Global search and replace * More * Format 2-up.sql * More * Ready to update sql queries * Adjust SQL queries * No errors or warnings * REMOVE COLUMN is not a thing. * Let's try this * Oh formatting * Proper migration * Rewrite migration * Reduce storage_info test thresholds * PR feedback * Doc change * Ooopss
| // TODO: this must be generalized to support multiple dependencies. | ||
| // we're only using the first here. | ||
| if let Some(dep) = dep.first() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This only affects hc_sleuth which is an experimental diagnostic tool
maackle
changed the title
| @@ -127,15 +127,18 @@ CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS DhtOp ( | |||
| num_validation_attempts INTEGER NULL, | |||
| last_validation_attempt INTEGER NULL, | |||
|
|
|||
| -- The integration dependency if there is one. | |||
| -- The FIRST integration dependency if there is one. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You could mention that his is an action that another action like update or delete references.
| dependency BLOB NULL, | ||
| -- The SECOND integration dependency if there is one. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And that this is only used by warrants.
| AND OP_DEP.when_integrated IS NOT NULL | ||
| AND OP_DEP.type = :create_link | ||
| ( | ||
| DhtOpDep.action_hash = DhtOp.dependency |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it possible to have the convention to store chain op deps in DhtOp.dependency and warrant op dependency 2 in DhtOp.dependency2? This change wouldn't be needed then.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure what you mean. The way I read this, it sounds like you're suggesting putting a chain op dep in one slot, and one of the warrant op deps in the other?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, yes, exactly. Keep the first slot dependency for chain ops' sys dependency or a warrant op's first dependency accordingly, and the second slot only for the warrant op's second dependency.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh yes of course. As you say it is how it is. And I see that the comment you're making is that all of these queries are only for chain ops, which have no second dependency, and so including that is redundant, which is also correct. I'll change that back to only check the first dep.
Summary
Part of #3639
With the addition of ChainFork warrants, with two actions referenced, DhtOps in general now can have multiple sys validation dependencies.
However now that i wrote this, this function is only being used to check for the existence of dependencies, the actual deps returned are never used.
TODO: