#628 Deprecating Private Transaction hash/getHash() #639
Conversation
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
Signed-off-by: Lucas Saldanha <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Lucas Saldanha <[email protected]>
pinges
approved these changes
Apr 3, 2020
| "Processing private transaction {} in privacy group {}", | ||
| privateTransaction.getHash(), | ||
| privacyGroupId); | ||
| LOG.debug("Processing private transaction {} in privacy group {}", pmtHash, privacyGroupId); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"Processing private transaction corresponding to PMT {} in privacy group {}"?
| @@ -414,8 +416,11 @@ public BigInteger getV() { | |||
| /** | |||
| * Returns the transaction hash. | |||
| * | |||
| * @deprecated All private transactions should be identified by their correspondent PMT hash. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should it be "corresponding"? I'm not sure, maybe we should ask Madeline :-)
| @@ -122,6 +122,7 @@ public PrivateTransactionSimulator( | |||
| publicWorldState.updater(), | |||
| disposablePrivateState.updater(), | |||
| header, | |||
| Hash.ZERO, // PMT hash is not needed as this private transaction doesn't exist | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What about this: "// Corresponding PMT does not exist."
| @@ -38,25 +38,21 @@ public PrivateTransactionValidator(final Optional<BigInteger> chainId) { | |||
| final PrivateTransaction transaction, | |||
| final Long accountNonce, | |||
| final boolean allowFutureNonces) { | |||
| LOG.debug("Validating private transaction fields of {}", transaction.getHash()); | |||
| LOG.debug("Validating private transaction {}", transaction); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"Validating private transaction corresponding to PMT {}" ?
| "Processing private transaction {} in privacy group {}", | ||
| privateTransaction.getHash(), | ||
| privacyGroupId); | ||
| LOG.debug("Processing private transaction {} in privacy group {}", pmtHash, privacyGroupId); |
| final ValidationResult<TransactionValidator.TransactionInvalidReason> | ||
| signatureValidationResult = validateTransactionSignature(transaction); | ||
| if (!signatureValidationResult.isValid()) { | ||
| LOG.debug( | ||
| "Private Transaction {}, failed validation {}, {}", | ||
| transaction.getHash(), | ||
| "Private Transaction failed signature validation {}, {}", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We might not need the "corresponding to PMT" business here ....
Signed-off-by: Lucas Saldanha <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Lucas Saldanha <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Lucas Saldanha <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
PR description
• Deprecating Private Transaction hash/getHash()
• In the future, private transactions will be addressed by their PMT hash