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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
fog-view: Limit number of user events, and tell client this happened #3151
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
fog-view: Limit number of user events, and tell client this happened #3151
Changes from 2 commits
28bf64f
704734a
22adbdf
c94da3e
64f407d
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
In the PR description you write: "I believe that this is a backwards compatible change, because old clients will ignore this flag".
But if it's true that "clients cannot compute an accurate balance check until they have received all relevant user events," then how can an (old) client that ignores this flag accurately compute a balance check?
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.
Good question:
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.
It appears that we're returning all the
user_events
in thequery_response
below. If there are12_000
user_events
, then we return them all to the client AND we setmay_have_more_user_events
to true.However, the logic for
fn search_user_events
has this line:.limit(max_num_events as i64)
, andmax_num_events
==USER_EVENT_LIMIT
. How then canuser_events.len()
ever be > thanUSER_EVENT_LIMIT
?