-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
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
Print error in case XRPL tx scanning is failed and retry after timeout. #202
Print error in case XRPL tx scanning is failed and retry after timeout. #202
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.
Reviewed 2 of 2 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @dzmitryhil, @masihyeganeh, @miladz68, and @wojtek-coreum)
relayer/xrpl/scanner.go
line 139 at r1 (raw file):
// set minLedger to start with it in next iteration // even if the error was returned we still re-scan from the lastLedger if lastLedger != 0 {
I can see that you assign minLedger to -1 in some places
Is it ok that you compare it to 0 here ? maybe it should be if lastLedger > 0
?
For me it is not clear what is the logic behind -1 here
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.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @masihyeganeh, @miladz68, @wojtek-coreum, and @ysv)
relayer/xrpl/scanner.go
line 139 at r1 (raw file):
Previously, ysv (Yaroslav Savchuk) wrote…
I can see that you assign minLedger to -1 in some places
Is it ok that you compare it to 0 here ? maybe it should beif lastLedger > 0
?For me it is not clear what is the logic behind -1 here
Actually both are OK, but agree if lastLedger > 0
is better. Updated.
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.
Reviewed 1 of 2 files at r1, 1 of 1 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @masihyeganeh, @wojtek-coreum, and @ysv)
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.
Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @masihyeganeh and @wojtek-coreum)
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.
Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r3, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @masihyeganeh, @wojtek-coreum, and @ysv)
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.
Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r3, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @masihyeganeh and @wojtek-coreum)
Description
Print error in case XRPL tx scanning is failed and retry after timeout.
Reviewers checklist:
Authors checklist
This change is