feat: use client for prover-db-indexing - #212
Merged
Merged
Conversation
1.70.0Bug Fixes
Features
|
JayWhite2357
marked this pull request as draft
July 30, 2026 23:45
Contributor
Author
JayWhite2357
force-pushed
the
feat/use-client-for-prover-db-indexing
branch
4 times, most recently
from
August 3, 2026 07:16
29e6126 to
7003bfe
Compare
tlovell-sxt
reviewed
Aug 3, 2026
JayWhite2357
force-pushed
the
feat/use-client-for-prover-db-indexing
branch
from
August 3, 2026 19:46
7003bfe to
6679c06
Compare
JayWhite2357
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 3, 2026 20:10
tlovell-sxt
approved these changes
Aug 3, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Rationale for this change
This completes the code that switches the
prover_db_indexeroffchain worker to use the node's client rather than offchain indexing.What changes are included in this PR?
db_events_atis used instead ofoffchain_consumer::read_eventsforward_eventsis inlined since it is not tested individually, and does not substantially simplify the readability of the code.Are these changes tested?
Yes