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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
Some opinions on the new models #1117
base: frrist/etl-pkg
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some opinions on the new models #1117
Changes from 1 commit
ceb4594
ed27d8c
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.
While it is true that VM messages are basically messages, many of the fields such as
GasLimit
,GasFee
, andGasPremium
are all0
. Similarly, VMMessages do not contain aSignature
, nor do their receipts contain anEventRoot
(less sure on this, but a hunch). I think it may be more efficient to avoid embedding theMessage
andReceipt
structures inVmMessgae
and instead take a subset of the fields that are populated. wdyt?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.
Looking at gorm Embedded Structs has me thinking that it's better to have common non-null types between
Message
andVmMessage
wrapped like:which can then be respectively added as an embedded struct for both
Message
andVmMessage
. This way it'll be easier to see what they do have in common and what they don't. But this is also not a ⛰️ I'm gonna die on lol.