Event indexing improvements #698
Merged
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
cam-schultz
requested review from
iansuvak,
richardpringle,
geoff-vball,
bernard-avalabs and
michaelkaplan13
geoff-vball
approved these changes
Jan 10, 2025
iansuvak
approved these changes
Jan 10, 2025
bernard-avalabs
approved these changes
Jan 13, 2025
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Why this should be merged
indexedkeywords frombyteevent fields so that the full data is emitted, rather than the keccak hash.Addsindexedkeywords to event fields from which it was missingEDIT: These events omitted
indexedfor a reason. Thanks @geoff-vball for calling that out.Fixes #689
How this works
See above
How this was tested
CI. Explicitly check Node ID in integration tests.
Note: Unfortunately, the unit tests somewhat mask the implicit hashing done to
indexed bytesfields, since the mock event emitted in forge unit tests also perform this hashing. That is why checks like this pass at present. I haven't found a great way to workaround this in unit tests, but the explicit check against emitted Node ID values in the integration tests should provide similar coverage.How is this documented
N/A