feat: wallet-service nano contract update #96
Conversation
|
|
||
| We could make it work with sparse keys with a common prefix but a better alternative is to use a JSON key, where each key will be the address and the value will be the seqnum. | ||
|
|
||
| - Clearing the cache can be done with [JSON.CLEAR](https://redis.io/docs/latest/commands/json.clear/) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like the idea of using redis since we already have it in the stack
But can you describe better how this is going to work?
I mean, when are we going to clear cache? Or is the number only going up for all addresses?
| 5. Forward any contract-specific API calls to the fullnode | ||
|
|
||
| This means that if address is the caller in a contract call that moves tokens from X to Y (e.g. a deposit action), all three addresses will see this transaction in their history: | ||
| This means that if address Z is the caller in a contract call that moves tokens from X to Y (e.g. a deposit action), all three addresses will see this transaction in their history: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not a problem bug "contract call that moves tokens from X to Y (e.g. a deposit action)" a deposit action moves tokens from X to the contract, not to an address Y. Maybe this address Y could be the change address.
|
|
||
| ### Seqnum tracking | ||
|
|
||
| The `seqnum` should be easily searched by address and listed (for clearing when a block arrives). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was thinking about this tracking. We will set the current seqnum every time a new nano transaction arrives from the reliable integrations event. When building a new nano tx in the wallet lib, we need to know the next seqnum to use, so (i) we must have a way to fetch this seqnum from the wallet service, and (ii) how long does it take for the new event to be processed and the seqnum updated? Should we have a way to update this seqnum as soon as the transaction is pushed to the network (if done using the wallet service APIs)?
rendered