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

Nonce of private transaction not incrementing when private transaction reverts #1942

Closed
1 of 3 tasks
MadelineMurray opened this issue Feb 24, 2021 · 6 comments · Fixed by #6593
Closed
1 of 3 tasks
Assignees
Labels
privacy private transactions TeamRevenant GH issues worked on by Revenant Team

Comments

@MadelineMurray
Copy link
Contributor

MadelineMurray commented Feb 24, 2021

Raised in RocketChat:

Hi community,
We have noticed that if a private tx reverts (e.g, when a require condition fails), then the private nonce is not incremented. On the other hand, the public nonce, that of the privacy marker tx, do increment. So my question is: ¿is there any way to change this behaviour, allowing the private nonce to increment? We have found this situation problematic when leading with concurrent private tx, because if tx n fails, then n+1, n+2, etc will also fail.
Thank you very much in advance community!

  • Confirm behaviour is inconsistent with public transaction behaviour
  • Document current behaviour as a known issue
  • (longer term) If yes, fix. Fix will require a CLI option or preferably something better (something in the database possibly) to not break backwards compatibility. -> this might be support for forks in privacy - and this is also a way to deprecate privacy methods in future
@MadelineMurray MadelineMurray added the TeamRevenant GH issues worked on by Revenant Team label Feb 25, 2021
@pinges pinges self-assigned this Mar 19, 2021
@vmichalik
Copy link

@pinges what is this blocked by? or does it just need to be re-prioritised?

@vmichalik
Copy link

Need to determine if this would break existing users' workflows

@vmichalik vmichalik added the privacy private transactions label Jul 28, 2021
@sirano11
Copy link

sirano11 commented Jul 5, 2022

Hi, @vmichalik @pinges
Can you tell me if this behavior is intended or not? If this is a bug, can you tell me if there are any plans to fix it or how to workaround it?

@non-fungible-nelson
Copy link
Contributor

@macfarla - stale? can i close?

@macfarla
Copy link
Contributor

@antonydenyer any update on your draft PR?

@antonydenyer
Copy link
Member

Yes, still in progress. Couple things to consider around 'transitions/forks' with existing networks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
privacy private transactions TeamRevenant GH issues worked on by Revenant Team
Projects
None yet
8 participants