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

[Account Storage Maps] Add return value to account migration scheduling functions #3695

Conversation

turbolent
Copy link
Member

Work towards #3584

Description

Add a return value to the functions which allow scheduling the migration of accounts.

We need this value in the system contract which will call the function to know if the V2 storage format is enabled, and the migration can be performed.


  • Targeted PR against master branch
  • Linked to Github issue with discussion and accepted design OR link to spec that describes this work
  • Code follows the standards mentioned here
  • Updated relevant documentation
  • Re-reviewed Files changed in the Github PR explorer
  • Added appropriate labels

@turbolent turbolent requested a review from fxamacker November 25, 2024 22:53
@turbolent turbolent self-assigned this Nov 25, 2024
@turbolent turbolent requested a review from SupunS as a code owner November 25, 2024 22:53
Copy link

Cadence Benchstat comparison

This branch with compared with the base branch onflow:feature/combine-domain-payloads-and-domain-storage-maps commit caaf254
The command for i in {1..N}; do go test ./... -run=XXX -bench=. -benchmem -shuffle=on; done was used.
Bench tests were run a total of 7 times on each branch.

Collapsed results for better readability

@turbolent turbolent merged commit 8e40b73 into feature/combine-domain-payloads-and-domain-storage-maps Nov 26, 2024
7 of 9 checks passed
@turbolent turbolent deleted the bastian/account-migration-scheduling-return-value branch November 26, 2024 21:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants