Skip to content
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

Use High-Level EigenDA Client #23

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
May 30, 2024
Merged

Use High-Level EigenDA Client #23

merged 6 commits into from
May 30, 2024

Conversation

teddyknox
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

@teddyknox teddyknox changed the title Depend on eigenda client Use High-Level EigenDA Client May 29, 2024
@teddyknox teddyknox marked this pull request as ready for review May 29, 2024 22:41
Copy link
Collaborator

@epociask epociask left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Mostly knits and documentation stuff - otherwise code LGTM

eigenda/config.go Show resolved Hide resolved
eigenda/config.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
eigenda/config.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
eigenda/config.go Show resolved Hide resolved
go.mod Show resolved Hide resolved
test/e2e_test.go Show resolved Hide resolved
eigenda/config.go Show resolved Hide resolved
eigenda/config.go Show resolved Hide resolved
eigenda/config.go Show resolved Hide resolved
@teddyknox teddyknox requested a review from epociask May 30, 2024 13:47
@@ -30,12 +31,19 @@ func (e EigenDAStore) Get(ctx context.Context, key []byte) ([]byte, error) {
if err != nil {
return nil, fmt.Errorf("failed to decode DA cert to RLP format: %w", err)
}
blob, err := e.client.RetrieveBlob(ctx, cert.BatchHeaderHash, cert.BlobIndex)
blob, err := e.client.GetBlob(ctx, cert.BatchHeaderHash, cert.BlobIndex)
Copy link

@afkbyte afkbyte May 30, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I feel like there are still cases where we would want to use the disperser client rather than the high level to retrieve a blob for backwards compatibility but not sure if this is something we should address in this PR.

Say someone already running an chain with an integration using the disperser client upgrades to one using this proxy server, if they wanted to retrieve and validate a historical batch we would error out.

we can also probably handle this in the integration itself -> if a Get from the Proxy Server fails then we retry with the old disperser interface.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm leaning towards handling it in the proxy server because the backwards compatibility handling is something we'd need to duplicate across integrations if we don't handle it here

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes agreed. Right now I don't think we have any backwards compatibility concerns but in the future we should build backwards compatibility into this.

Copy link
Collaborator

@epociask epociask left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@teddyknox teddyknox merged commit 66915b2 into main May 30, 2024
3 checks passed
@teddyknox teddyknox deleted the depend-on-eigenda-client branch May 30, 2024 15:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants