upgrade to cosmos sdk v0.45 #782
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #782 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 19.96% 19.98% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 189 189
Lines 24542 24547 +5
==========================================
+ Hits 4899 4905 +6
+ Misses 18788 18787 -1
Partials 855 855
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
| @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ go 1.17 | |||
| require ( | |||
| github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk v0.44.5 | |||
| github.com/cosmos/go-bip39 v1.0.0 | |||
| github.com/cosmos/iavl v0.17.2 | |||
| github.com/cosmos/iavl v0.17.3 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The patch fixed an edge case in an incorrect manner, that puts another blocking mutex contention in every query. I guess we can just fix later in our later improvements, since its not a big impact until #604 anyway.
| capabilitytypes.ModuleName, minttypes.ModuleName, | ||
| poolincentivestypes.ModuleName, | ||
| distrtypes.ModuleName, slashingtypes.ModuleName, | ||
| evidencetypes.ModuleName, stakingtypes.ModuleName, ibchost.ModuleName, ibctransfertypes.ModuleName, | ||
| authtypes.ModuleName, banktypes.ModuleName, govtypes.ModuleName, crisistypes.ModuleName, genutiltypes.ModuleName, | ||
| authz.ModuleName, | ||
| paramstypes.ModuleName, vestingtypes.ModuleName, | ||
| gammtypes.ModuleName, incentivestypes.ModuleName, lockuptypes.ModuleName, claimtypes.ModuleName, | ||
| poolincentivestypes.ModuleName, superfluidtypes.ModuleName, bech32ibctypes.ModuleName, txfeestypes.ModuleName, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was it a bug before that we didn't have everything listed, or did not listing them here mean their begin block could occur in any order after everything ordered was done?
Ditto question for end blocker
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This was a new requirement with 0.45 to avoid things being unlisted.
Before you only listed the ones being run. Now you must list all or it will panic on startup
There was a problem hiding this comment.
oh cool, thanks for the explanation! Didn't know that
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, idk how I feel about this. Seems to just make it more messy imo...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, this whole explicit singly ordered list seems like an unscalable and error prone method.
I hope with the new app wiring work, theres a way for modules to declare what they need to come after, and then app.go linearizes the init genesis' itself. I should ask whats the plan there
| @@ -388,7 +402,9 @@ func NewOsmosisApp( | |||
| ibchost.ModuleName, | |||
| gammtypes.ModuleName, | |||
| txfeestypes.ModuleName, | |||
| genutiltypes.ModuleName, evidencetypes.ModuleName, ibctransfertypes.ModuleName, | |||
| genutiltypes.ModuleName, evidencetypes.ModuleName, authz.ModuleName, | |||
| paramstypes.ModuleName, upgradetypes.ModuleName, vestingtypes.ModuleName, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are these three all new, or were there bugs before with them not being present?
(The three being paramstypes.ModuleName, upgradetypes.ModuleName, vestingtypes.ModuleName)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
one of the things that I did in the annotation branch is "flatten" the *.ModuleName to make it easier to read.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@faddat wdym by flatten?
|
Hi! When I started building Craft Economy a few weeks ago, I explored the latest commits from the cosmos-sdk. I've been working with some newer devs on it, and ended up doing a pretty detailed annotation of app.go I just did the same for Osmosis and I'm gonna send it as a PR to the sunny/sdk-v0.45 branch :) |
Closes: #676
Update go.mod once osmosis-labs/cosmos-sdk#59 is approved
Description
For contributor use:
docs/) or specification (x/<module>/spec/)Unreleasedsection inCHANGELOG.mdFiles changedin the Github PR explorer