Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Aug 18, 2020. It is now read-only.

[CO-450] Fix random-improve fallback (develop) #4159

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Jun 11, 2019

Conversation

KtorZ
Copy link
Contributor

@KtorZ KtorZ commented Jun 10, 2019

Description

  • A fix for the error messages which used to report a wrong balance upon failure.
  • Implementation of the solution A
  • Three automated regression tests:
    • Verify that the fallback fix indeed works. Test was introduced prior to the fix to illustrate how the random-improve algorithm would greedily consume all available inputs leaving nothing for remaining outputs. Fixed with the fallback introduced in A.
    • Verify that the API now returns a correct balance when indeed, the selection fails to select additional UTxO in a multi-outputs transaction
    • An extra regression tests related to CO-449, proving that the guard added for CO-449 is indeed successful at catching oversized transactions

Linked issue

See CO-450

Type of change

  • 🐞 Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • 🛠 New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • ⚠️ Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
  • 🏭 Refactoring that does not change existing functionality but does improve things like code readability, structure etc
  • 🔨 New or improved tests for existing code
  • ⛑ git-flow chore (backport, hotfix, etc)

Developer checklist

  • I have read the style guide document, and my code follows the code style of this project.
  • If my code deals with exceptions, it follows the guidelines.
  • I have updated any documentation accordingly, if needed. Documentation changes can be reflected in opening a PR on cardanodocs.com, amending the inline Haddock comments, any relevant README file or one of the document listed in the docs directory.
  • CHANGELOG entry has been added and is linked to the correct PR on GitHub.

Testing checklist

  • I have added tests to cover my changes.
  • All new and existing tests passed.

QA Steps

Screenshots (if available)

How to merge

Send the message bors r+ to merge this PR. For more information, see
docs/how-to/bors.md.

@KtorZ KtorZ requested a review from piotr-iohk June 10, 2019 08:54
@KtorZ KtorZ self-assigned this Jun 10, 2019
Copy link

@piotr-iohk piotr-iohk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍

@tatyanavych
Copy link
Contributor

The same code was also reviewed by @edsko in #4157

@KtorZ
Copy link
Contributor Author

KtorZ commented Jun 11, 2019

bors r+

iohk-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 11, 2019
4159: [CO-450] Fix random-improve fallback (develop) r=KtorZ a=KtorZ

## Description

<!--- A brief description of this PR and the problem is trying to solve -->

- A fix for the error messages which used to report a wrong balance upon failure. 
- Implementation of the solution A
- Three automated regression tests:
    - Verify that the fallback fix indeed works. Test was introduced prior to the fix to illustrate how the random-improve algorithm would greedily consume all available inputs leaving nothing for remaining outputs. Fixed with the fallback introduced in A.
    - Verify that the API now returns a correct balance when indeed, the selection fails to select additional UTxO in a multi-outputs transaction
    - An extra regression tests related to [CO-449](https://iohk.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/CO-449), proving that the guard added for CO-449 is indeed successful at catching oversized transactions

## Linked issue

<!--- Put here the relevant issue from YouTrack -->

See [CO-450](https://iohk.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/CO-450)



Co-authored-by: KtorZ <matthias.benkort@gmail.com>
@iohk-bors
Copy link
Contributor

iohk-bors bot commented Jun 11, 2019

@iohk-bors iohk-bors bot merged commit 5047a62 into develop Jun 11, 2019
@iohk-bors iohk-bors bot deleted the KtorZ/CO-450/fix-random-improve-fallback-develop branch June 11, 2019 12:40
Copy link
Contributor

@tatyanavych tatyanavych left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Removed comment

@KtorZ KtorZ mentioned this pull request Jun 11, 2019
12 tasks
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants