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

feat!: limit the max tx size to 2 MiB #3909

Merged
merged 20 commits into from
Oct 11, 2024
Merged

feat!: limit the max tx size to 2 MiB #3909

merged 20 commits into from
Oct 11, 2024

Conversation

ninabarbakadze
Copy link
Member

@ninabarbakadze ninabarbakadze commented Sep 25, 2024

Overview

Fixes #3686

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Sep 25, 2024

PR Preview Action v1.4.8
🚀 Deployed preview to https://celestiaorg.github.io/celestia-app/pr-preview/pr-3909/
on branch gh-pages at 2024-10-11 16:25 UTC

app/ante/max_tx_size.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
app/ante/max_tx_size.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/appconsts/v3/app_consts.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/appconsts/versioned_consts.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
The AnteHandler chains together several decorators to ensure the following criteria are met for app version 3:

- The tx does not contain any messages that are unsupported by the current app version. See `MsgVersioningGateKeeper`.
- The tx size is not larger than the application's configured versioned constant MaxTxSize.
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'll add the link to MaxTxSize in appconsts once this pr is merged

@ninabarbakadze ninabarbakadze marked this pull request as ready for review October 4, 2024 08:05
@ninabarbakadze ninabarbakadze requested review from liamsi and a team as code owners October 4, 2024 08:05
@ninabarbakadze ninabarbakadze requested review from rootulp and evan-forbes and removed request for a team October 4, 2024 08:05
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 4, 2024

📝 Walkthrough
📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The changes introduce a new decorator, MaxTxSizeDecorator, to the transaction handling process, ensuring transactions do not exceed a specified size limit. This decorator is added to the NewAnteHandler function, which is responsible for processing transactions. Additionally, a new constant MaxTxBytes is defined to set the maximum transaction size, and corresponding tests have been implemented to validate the decorator's functionality across various scenarios.

Changes

File Change Summary
app/ante/ante.go Added NewMaxTxSizeDecorator() to NewAnteHandler for transaction size validation.
app/ante/max_tx_size.go Introduced MaxTxSizeDecorator type with AnteHandle method to enforce transaction size limits.
app/ante/max_tx_size_test.go Created tests for MaxTxSizeDecorator to validate behavior with various transaction sizes and versions.
pkg/appconsts/v3/app_consts.go Added constant MaxTxBytes set to 2097152 (2 MiB).
pkg/appconsts/versioned_consts.go Added function MaxTxBytes to return the value of v3.MaxTxBytes.
app/process_proposal.go Modified to set transaction bytes in context for application versions 3 and above.
app/validate_txs.go Modified filterStdTxs and filterBlobTxs to set transaction size on context.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Cap the size of the transaction to reduce strain on network (#3686)

Possibly related PRs

  • chore: optimize checkTx #3954: The changes in this PR involve updates to the ProcessProposal method and the prepare_proposal_test.go file, which are directly related to the modifications made in the main PR regarding transaction processing and size management.

Suggested labels

enhancement, WS: Big Blonks 🔭, WS: Maintenance 🔧

Suggested reviewers

  • rootulp
  • evan-forbes
  • cmwaters

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 70b4174 and f600227.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • app/test/prepare_proposal_test.go (6 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • app/test/prepare_proposal_test.go

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

‼️ IMPORTANT
Auto-reply has been disabled for this repository in the CodeRabbit settings. The CodeRabbit bot will not respond to your replies unless it is explicitly tagged.

  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (7)
pkg/appconsts/versioned_consts.go (2)

45-47: Consider implementing the previous review suggestion

As suggested in a previous review, consider removing the parameter name for consistency:

-func MaxTxBytes(_ uint64) int {
+func MaxTxBytes(uint64) int {
 	return v3.MaxTxBytes
}

This change improves code clarity by explicitly showing that the parameter is unused.


45-47: Add a comment explaining the unused parameter

Consider adding a comment to explain the purpose of the unused uint64 parameter. If it's for future versioning, make this explicit:

+// MaxTxBytes returns the maximum transaction size in bytes.
+// The uint64 parameter is reserved for future versioning and is currently unused.
func MaxTxBytes(_ uint64) int {
	return v3.MaxTxBytes
}

This addition would improve code documentation and clarify the intent behind the function signature.

app/ante/max_tx_size_test.go (3)

20-50: LGTM: Test cases cover important scenarios.

The test cases are well-defined and cover crucial scenarios including valid transaction size, oversized transactions, edge cases, and version compatibility. The use of v3.MaxTxBytes constant ensures the test adapts to changes in the maximum transaction size.

Consider adding an additional test case for a transaction size slightly below the maximum threshold (e.g., v3.MaxTxBytes - 1000) to ensure there's no off-by-one error in the implementation.


52-72: LGTM: Test execution logic is robust and well-implemented.

The test execution logic is sound, iterating over each test case, setting up the appropriate context, and verifying the results. The use of the require package ensures clear test failure messages.

Consider adding a comment explaining the purpose of ctx.WithTxBytes(txBytes) to improve code readability. For example:

// Set the transaction bytes in the context to simulate a transaction of the specified size
ctx = ctx.WithTxBytes(txBytes)

1-72: Great job on implementing comprehensive tests for MaxTxSizeDecorator!

This test file effectively validates the functionality of the MaxTxSizeDecorator, aligning well with the PR objectives of implementing a maximum transaction size. The tests cover various scenarios, including valid and invalid transaction sizes, edge cases, and version compatibility.

The code is well-structured, follows Go best practices, and uses appropriate testing utilities. This will help ensure the robustness of the transaction size limitation feature.

As the project evolves, consider expanding these tests to cover more edge cases and potential real-world scenarios. This could include testing with different types of transactions or simulating network conditions that might affect transaction processing.

specs/src/ante_handler_v3.md (1)

6-6: Approved addition with a suggestion for improvement

The new criterion for transaction size validation aligns well with the PR objectives of capping transaction size to reduce network strain. This is a valuable addition to the AnteHandler specifications.

To enhance clarity and maintainability, consider adding a reference or link to the definition of MaxTxBytes. This would help developers quickly locate the specific value and any related configuration details.

Consider adding a reference like this:

- The tx size is not larger than the application's configured versioned constant MaxTxBytes (defined in [appconsts](link-to-appconsts-file)).
app/ante/max_tx_size.go (1)

10-11: Improve comment clarity for MaxTxSizeDecorator.

Consider rephrasing the comment to form a complete sentence and enhance readability. For example:

-// MaxTxSizeDecorator ensures that a tx can not be larger than
-// application's configured versioned constant.
+// MaxTxSizeDecorator ensures that a transaction cannot exceed
+// the application's configured maximum size.
📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between c713401 and 941f55b.

📒 Files selected for processing (7)
  • app/ante/ante.go (1 hunks)
  • app/ante/max_tx_size.go (1 hunks)
  • app/ante/max_tx_size_test.go (1 hunks)
  • pkg/appconsts/v3/app_consts.go (1 hunks)
  • pkg/appconsts/versioned_consts.go (1 hunks)
  • pkg/appconsts/versioned_consts_test.go (1 hunks)
  • specs/src/ante_handler_v3.md (1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
  • pkg/appconsts/v3/app_consts.go
🔇 Additional comments (6)
pkg/appconsts/versioned_consts.go (2)

45-47: LGTM: Function aligns with PR objectives

The MaxTxBytes function correctly provides access to the maximum transaction size, which is crucial for implementing the transaction size cap as per the PR objectives.


45-47: Verify the usage of MaxTxBytes in the codebase

To ensure that this function is being used correctly to implement the transaction size cap, we should verify its usage across the codebase.

✅ Verification successful

MaxTxBytes usage verified across the codebase

The MaxTxBytes function is consistently utilized in all relevant areas to enforce transaction size limits, ensuring correct implementation of the transaction size cap.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for usages of MaxTxBytes function to verify its implementation in capping transaction sizes.

# Test: Search for MaxTxBytes usage
echo "Searching for MaxTxBytes usage:"
rg --type go "MaxTxBytes\(" -A 5

# Test: Search for potential transaction size checks
echo "Searching for potential transaction size checks:"
rg --type go "tx.*size|size.*tx" -i

Length of output: 15509

app/ante/max_tx_size_test.go (2)

1-14: LGTM: Package declaration and imports are well-structured.

The package name and imports are appropriate for the test file. The use of aliases for different versions of app constants (v2, v3) enhances readability.


16-19: LGTM: Test function setup is correct.

The test function is properly named and the setup correctly initializes the MaxTxSizeDecorator and chains it with sdk.ChainAnteDecorators.

pkg/appconsts/versioned_consts_test.go (1)

69-74: LGTM! The new test case aligns well with the PR objectives.

The addition of this test case for MaxTxBytes in version 3 is a good implementation. It directly supports the PR's goal of capping transaction sizes by ensuring that the new constant is correctly set and can be retrieved. This test will help maintain the integrity of the transaction size limit as the codebase evolves.

app/ante/ante.go (1)

35-36: Approve addition of NewMaxTxSizeDecorator with suggestions

The addition of NewMaxTxSizeDecorator() aligns well with the PR objectives of capping transaction size to alleviate network strain. Its placement in the decorator chain is logical, allowing for early rejection of oversized transactions.

However, I have a few suggestions to enhance clarity and ensure proper implementation:

  1. Please provide information about the implementation of NewMaxTxSizeDecorator(). What specific size limit is being enforced?
  2. Consider adding a comment to explain how this new decorator interacts with the existing NewConsumeGasForTxSizeDecorator. Are they complementary or potentially redundant?
  3. It would be helpful to see the implementation of NewMaxTxSizeDecorator() to ensure it correctly enforces the desired transaction size limit.

To verify the implementation and usage of NewMaxTxSizeDecorator(), please run the following script:

✅ Verification successful

Approve addition of NewMaxTxSizeDecorator with implementation verified

The NewMaxTxSizeDecorator() correctly enforces a transaction size limit of 2 MiB, aligning with the PR objectives of capping transaction size to alleviate network strain. Its placement in the decorator chain allows for early rejection of oversized transactions, and the implementation is supported by relevant test cases (TestMaxTxSizeDecorator).

Suggestions:

  1. Add comments to clearly state the enforced transaction size limit.
  2. Document the interaction between NewMaxTxSizeDecorator and existing decorators to ensure clarity.
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the implementation of NewMaxTxSizeDecorator

# Test: Search for the implementation of NewMaxTxSizeDecorator
echo "Searching for NewMaxTxSizeDecorator implementation:"
rg --type go "func NewMaxTxSizeDecorator\(" -A 10

# Test: Check for any constants or variables related to max transaction size
echo "\nSearching for max transaction size constants or variables:"
rg --type go "(MaxTxSize|MAX_TX_SIZE)"

# Test: Look for tests related to max transaction size
echo "\nSearching for related test cases:"
rg --type go "TestMaxTxSize"

Length of output: 1955


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Locate the definition and value of MaxTxBytes

echo "Searching for the definition of MaxTxBytes:"
rg --type go "const\s+MaxTxBytes\s*="

echo "\nSearching for configurations or usages of MaxTxBytes:"
rg --type go "MaxTxBytes"

Length of output: 1785

Comment on lines 22 to 23
if len(ctx.TxBytes()) >= appconsts.MaxTxBytes(ctx.BlockHeader().Version.App) {
return ctx, sdkerrors.ErrTxTooLarge
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

⚠️ Potential issue

Correct the transaction size comparison operator.

The current condition rejects transactions that are exactly the maximum allowed size:

if len(ctx.TxBytes()) >= appconsts.MaxTxBytes(ctx.BlockHeader().Version.App) {

If the intention is to allow transactions up to and including the maximum size, consider changing the comparison operator to >:

-if len(ctx.TxBytes()) >= appconsts.MaxTxBytes(ctx.BlockHeader().Version.App) {
+if len(ctx.TxBytes()) > appconsts.MaxTxBytes(ctx.BlockHeader().Version.App) {

This change ensures that transactions equal to the maximum size are accepted, and only those exceeding it are rejected.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this is good to note, whichever is used, we simply need to document it

using strictly greater than makes sense to me, as we can just use that constant everywhere instead of subtracting 1 everywhere as well

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I second this that it would be better if it were strictly greater than 2MB

rootulp
rootulp previously approved these changes Oct 4, 2024
Copy link
Collaborator

@rootulp rootulp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Implementation LGTM, great work! I think we need a FLUP issue to write a CIP for this.

nit: PR title should include ! because I think this is consensus breaking.

@rootulp rootulp changed the title feat: cap tx size AnteHandler feat!: cap tx size AnteHandler Oct 4, 2024
@rootulp
Copy link
Collaborator

rootulp commented Oct 4, 2024

Another nit: PR title could be more readable to end-users b/c it will show up in release notes. For example: "feat!: limit the max tx size to 2 MiB".

Can also add this to release notes.

@ninabarbakadze ninabarbakadze changed the title feat!: cap tx size AnteHandler feat!: limit the max tx size to 2 MiB Oct 7, 2024
@ninabarbakadze
Copy link
Member Author

Another nit: PR title could be more readable to end-users b/c it will show up in release notes. For example: "feat!: limit the max tx size to 2 MiB".

Can also add this to release notes.

Thanks @rootulp! Updated :)

app/ante/max_tx_size.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines 22 to 23
if len(ctx.TxBytes()) >= appconsts.MaxTxBytes(ctx.BlockHeader().Version.App) {
return ctx, sdkerrors.ErrTxTooLarge
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this is good to note, whichever is used, we simply need to document it

using strictly greater than makes sense to me, as we can just use that constant everywhere instead of subtracting 1 everywhere as well

Copy link
Contributor

@cmwaters cmwaters left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A few nits otherwise looks good

@celestia-bot celestia-bot requested a review from a team October 8, 2024 14:02
@celestia-bot celestia-bot requested a review from a team October 10, 2024 20:47
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
app/ante/max_tx_size.go (1)

19-33: LGTM: AnteHandle method is well-implemented with clear error messaging.

The method correctly checks the app version and transaction size. The error message now includes all necessary information for users.

Consider using errors.New() or a custom error type instead of fmt.Errorf() for better error handling:

return ctx, errors.New(fmt.Sprintf("tx size %d bytes is larger than the application's configured threshold of %d bytes. Please reduce the size by %d bytes", currentTxSize, maxTxBytes, bytesOverLimit))

This allows for easier error checking and type assertions in the calling code.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 12dfb01 and 54b2b4d.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • app/ante/max_tx_size.go (1 hunks)
  • app/ante/max_tx_size_test.go (1 hunks)
  • app/process_proposal.go (2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
  • app/ante/max_tx_size_test.go
  • app/process_proposal.go
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (3)
app/ante/max_tx_size.go (3)

1-9: LGTM: Package declaration and imports are appropriate.

The package name "ante" is suitable for an ante handler, and the imports are relevant to the implemented functionality.


11-17: LGTM: MaxTxSizeDecorator type and constructor are well-defined.

The MaxTxSizeDecorator is correctly implemented as an empty struct, and its constructor follows Go conventions.


1-33: Overall implementation aligns well with PR objectives.

The MaxTxSizeDecorator successfully implements the transaction size limit as described in the PR objectives. It correctly applies the limit only to app versions 3 and onwards, addressing the need to cap transaction sizes to alleviate network strain.

Key points:

  1. The implementation is clean and follows Go best practices.
  2. It provides clear error messages to guide users when their transactions exceed the size limit.
  3. The code addresses previous review comments, such as using the correct comparison operator.

This implementation enhances the network's resilience against excessive load and provides clear guidance for transaction batching.

@ninabarbakadze ninabarbakadze marked this pull request as draft October 10, 2024 21:12
@ninabarbakadze ninabarbakadze marked this pull request as ready for review October 10, 2024 21:20
evan-forbes
evan-forbes previously approved these changes Oct 10, 2024
Copy link
Member

@evan-forbes evan-forbes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

nice work!

Copy link
Contributor

@cmwaters cmwaters left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A few nits which would be nice to address but logically looks good

Comment on lines +69 to 73
// create 1 large sendTx that includes a large memo making the
// transaction over the configured max tx bytes limit
largeSendTx := testutil.SendTxsWithAccounts(
t, testApp, enc, kr, 1000, accounts[0], accounts[1:2], testutil.ChainID, user.SetMemo(largeMemo),
)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think the memo size is capped (256 bytes IIRC) so this will fail regardless

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

do you know where the memo check is? because it was failing with transaction too large error in the logs

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's called ValidateMemoDecorator

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

NewMaxTxSizeDecorator is called before so it'll be rejected for transaction being too large

Comment on lines +54 to +55
// Set the tx size on the context before calling the AnteHandler
ctx = ctx.WithTxBytes(tx)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: this would have been easier to follow if it was done once in PrepareProposal where the context actually is created

Comment on lines +71 to +74
// Set the tx bytes in the context for app version v3 and greater
if sdkCtx.BlockHeader().Version.App >= 3 {
sdkCtx = sdkCtx.WithTxBytes(tx)
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

same nit here: this would be easier to follow if it was placed right after sdkCtx is initialised on line 54

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it needs to be done while we're iterating over transactions in later lines no?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

so you suggest i iterate over block txs another time after context is created and set WithTxBytes there?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ignore me. I misunderstood this

@celestia-bot celestia-bot requested a review from a team October 11, 2024 16:25
@ninabarbakadze ninabarbakadze marked this pull request as draft October 11, 2024 16:30
@ninabarbakadze ninabarbakadze marked this pull request as ready for review October 11, 2024 16:38
Copy link
Collaborator

@rootulp rootulp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM great work.

Do we need a follow up issue to track writing a CIP for this change? I noted this elsewhere but perhaps the CIP can explain why we're using a tx validity rule instead of a mempool parameter.

@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
The AnteHandler chains together several decorators to ensure the following criteria are met for app version 3:

- The tx does not contain any messages that are unsupported by the current app version. See `MsgVersioningGateKeeper`.
- The tx size is not larger than the application's configured versioned constant MaxTxBytes.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

[not blocking] we should have considered naming it something else to avoid conflicting with the mempool parameter MaxTxBytes. For example MaxTxSize would've worked

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I can change it in a follow-up since i need to update the ante handler anyway :)

@@ -51,6 +51,10 @@ func filterStdTxs(logger log.Logger, dec sdk.TxDecoder, ctx sdk.Context, handler
logger.Error("decoding already checked transaction", "tx", tmbytes.HexBytes(coretypes.Tx(tx).Hash()), "error", err)
continue
}

// Set the tx size on the context before calling the AnteHandler
ctx = ctx.WithTxBytes(tx)
Copy link
Member

@evan-forbes evan-forbes Oct 11, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

we're setting the tx bytes twice here, but its not super important I don't think

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this is due to the merge. I'll update in a follow-up

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.

Cap the size of the transaction to reduce strain on network
4 participants