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(Event_Logs): How should we learn about unencrypted logs? #6626

Closed
Tracked by #2783
LHerskind opened this issue May 23, 2024 · 1 comment
Closed
Tracked by #2783

feat(Event_Logs): How should we learn about unencrypted logs? #6626

LHerskind opened this issue May 23, 2024 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@LHerskind
Copy link
Contributor

LHerskind commented May 23, 2024

While the aztec node is currently storing logs, and allow querying on a few properties, we don't have something like the indexed which is usual to see on EVM chains.

This is often used for frontends or the like, for example to look for transfer events that are important to the user, instead of looking at all the transfer events.

This is currently unsupported, and I think it should be considered for implementation. It seems fairly straight forward to implement a version where filtering on values is possible at the receiving end, but that seems wasteful, no need to provide us with all the logs if we are just instantly throwing half away.


For now I think we can do similar to what we allowed for private events, e.g., split the getEvents into a getPrivateEvents and a getPublicEvents and get a hold of either.

@sklppy88
Copy link
Contributor

sklppy88 commented Jul 10, 2024

Marked as completed via #7232.

We can definitely optimize the current approach more, but it will probably require a bit more thinking about the problem.

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Todo to Done in A3 Jul 10, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Archived in project
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants