-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 196
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: Distinguish between ErrTxnHashNotFound and ErrInternal #2486
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should also be handling the pending
block in v6
in the same way. As far as I know, this difference happened because the old code for v6
was copied in #2419 . You can use the same code from v7
and continue refactoring.
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
❌ Your patch check has failed because the patch coverage (47.05%) is below the target coverage (60.00%). You can increase the patch coverage or adjust the target coverage. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2486 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 73.78% 73.69% -0.09%
==========================================
Files 138 138
Lines 16925 16919 -6
==========================================
- Hits 12488 12469 -19
- Misses 3571 3580 +9
- Partials 866 870 +4 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Ah yes indeed, good catch! I updated v6 code, and I could then reuse v6 handler for v7. |
rpc pkg cleanup according to issue #2437
for v6: Updated handler code to take into account pending block as well.
for v7: Reuse v6 handler for v7 as the logic is the same.
for v8: The logic is the same as v6/v7, but not exactly the returned
Transaction
type (more particularly,Resource
type insideTransaction
type). Therefore, we cannot refactor v8's types or logic