Improve migration process #80
Conversation
| #[cfg(feature = "integration-test")] | ||
| #[result_serializer(borsh)] | ||
| #[must_use] | ||
| pub fn ft_balances_of( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why we don't create a real ft_balance_of function?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Because we are going to migrate accounts batches, so we need to get balances for multiple accounts at once to reduce the time that is needed for migration and gas usage.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My question was not about that. This function exists only if the integration-test feature turns on. But why don't we just support this function in the eth-connector contract? Why do we need to create a fake one?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This function returns mock values for tests and simulates the Aurora engine contract.
It is the same as the verify_log_entry_in_bound that simulates the Prover contract.
| if let Some(previous_balance) = self.ft.accounts.insert(account, amount) { | ||
| self.ft.total_supply -= previous_balance; | ||
| } | ||
| self.ft.total_supply += amount; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would move the line self.ft.total_supply += amount; to the beginning of the loop to prevent overflow.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Logically, it is impossible to get overflow(underflow) here. If we got it, then it means that we did something wrong, and the migration process should be stopped. The contract will panic because the flag overflow-checks is enabled.
Description
This PR improves the migration process and makes it more trustless by retrieving the balances on-chain instead of off-chain.
Changes:
contract_state.borshPerformance / NEAR gas cost considerations
Testing
How should this be reviewed
Additional information