Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 15, 2023. It is now read-only.

Make New Storage Layer Truly Default #11918

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Jul 26, 2022

Conversation

shawntabrizi
Copy link
Contributor

This PR simplifies the use of the Transactional Storage APIs introduced in #11431

The creation of a new storage layer is trivial enough that it can just be enabled by default, and thus avoid the use of in_storage_layer, and the need for a DispatchWithStorageLayer traits.

This also makes it more clear exactly what happens when you dispatch a call, no matter if you are already in a dispatchable or not.

@shawntabrizi shawntabrizi added the D9-needsaudit 👮 PR contains changes to fund-managing logic that should be properly reviewed and externally audited label Jul 26, 2022
@github-actions github-actions bot added the A0-please_review Pull request needs code review. label Jul 26, 2022
@shawntabrizi shawntabrizi changed the title Make Storage Layer Truly Default Make New Storage Layer Truly Default Jul 26, 2022
@shawntabrizi shawntabrizi added B7-runtimenoteworthy C1-low PR touches the given topic and has a low impact on builders. labels Jul 26, 2022
@shawntabrizi shawntabrizi added this to In progress in Runtime via automation Jul 26, 2022
Runtime automation moved this from In progress to Needs Audit Jul 26, 2022
@shawntabrizi
Copy link
Contributor Author

bot merge

@paritytech-processbot
Copy link

Waiting for commit status.

@paritytech-processbot
Copy link

Merge cancelled due to error. Error: Statuses failed for 8f87c2c

@shawntabrizi
Copy link
Contributor Author

bot rebase

@paritytech-processbot
Copy link

Rebased

@ggwpez
Copy link
Member

ggwpez commented Jul 26, 2022

bot merge

@paritytech-processbot paritytech-processbot bot merged commit 9acfbc0 into master Jul 26, 2022
@paritytech-processbot paritytech-processbot bot deleted the shawntabrizi-with-storage-layer branch July 26, 2022 17:49
Runtime automation moved this from Needs Audit to Done Jul 26, 2022
@kianenigma
Copy link
Contributor

can we now remove the manual #[transactional] tags from nomination-pools?

@jakoblell jakoblell added D1-audited 👍 PR contains changes to fund-managing logic that has been properly reviewed and externally audited and removed D9-needsaudit 👮 PR contains changes to fund-managing logic that should be properly reviewed and externally audited labels Aug 3, 2022
DaviRain-Su pushed a commit to octopus-network/substrate that referenced this pull request Aug 23, 2022
* with storage layer truly default

* fmt

Co-authored-by: parity-processbot <>
ark0f pushed a commit to gear-tech/substrate that referenced this pull request Feb 27, 2023
* with storage layer truly default

* fmt

Co-authored-by: parity-processbot <>
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
A0-please_review Pull request needs code review. C1-low PR touches the given topic and has a low impact on builders. D1-audited 👍 PR contains changes to fund-managing logic that has been properly reviewed and externally audited
Projects
No open projects
Runtime
  
Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants