feat: photon rpc + new cli #594
Conversation
sergeytimoshin
requested review from
vadorovsky and
ananas-block
as code owners
sergeytimoshin
requested review from
SwenSchaeferjohann
and removed request for
vadorovsky and
ananas-block
feat: sol decompression (#567) * feat: sol de compression * feat: JS compress and decompress lamports (#572) --------- Co-authored-by: Swen Schäferjohann <[email protected]> ci: add github ci syntax linter (#574) chore: Remove patched arkworks crates (#575) We are using only upstream 0.4.0 arkworks crates now, there is no need to point to patched 0.3.0 crates. feat: gnark circuits inclusion + non-inclusion 2-in-1 (#569) * feat: inclusion + non-inclusion gnark circuits * Refactor gnark server spawning and killing process. add actions for initSolOmnibusAccount, compressLamports, decompressLamports + happy path tests (#578) refactor: rename gnark proof inputs to plural form (#579) * refactor: rename gnark proof inputs to plural form * formatting feat: add SOL compression and decompression cli commands (#580) * Add SOL compression and decompression commands * Use getTestRpc instead of Connection in decompress and compress cli cmds. sync interface rpc-interface coerce from photon response. open: tests all endpoints except token wip: debug delay in photon indexing wip: RPC tests working. debug: merkleproof, notest: token wip: add sleep wip: fix cli build fresh install changes gnark-prover merkleproof confirmed for 2 consecutive leaves wip wip: built rm compress test dupe
Co-authored-by: Michal Rostecki <[email protected]>
sergeytimoshin
force-pushed
the
sergey/fix-cli-v2
branch
from
afd4445 to
b2673f6
Compare
Co-authored-by: Swen Schäferjohann <[email protected]>
|
edit: nice, all have been resolved. thx 3 caveats:
|
The `test` script in the package.json file was updated to include `test-prove` and `test-init-sol-pool`.
|
summary of changes
|
| var circuitDir = context.String("circuit-dir") | ||
| var inclusion = context.Bool("inclusion") | ||
| var nonInclusion = context.Bool("non-inclusion") | ||
| return prover.GetKeys(circuitDir, inclusion, nonInclusion) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
does this enable a server to be instantiated with both inclusion, combined and non-inclusion proving keys at the same time?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
combined is missing right?
| @@ -397,25 +387,25 @@ func runCli() { | |||
| break | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
| } else if circuit == "combined" { | |||
| } else if context.Bool("inclusion") && context.Bool("non-inclusion") { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is the idea that if both inclusion and non-inclusion flags are provided the combined circuit is used?
idk whether we use this part of the go cli at all but couldn't we ditch providing flags all together and just match the right circuit depending on the inputs like we discussed for the server?
(if we don't use this code just put a todo above)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i think it's good to have to specify the circuit flag, not just via overloading the call signature. it's a more explicit API that way. will also be useful when we add more other circuits in the future
| }, | ||
| &cli.BoolFlag{Name: "inclusion", Usage: "Run inclusion circuit", Required: false}, | ||
| &cli.BoolFlag{Name: "non-inclusion", Usage: "Run non-inclusion circuit", Required: false}, | ||
| &cli.BoolFlag{Name: "combined", Usage: "Run combined circuit", Required: false}, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There are a lot of combined provingkeys. Thus, I think for the server it makes sense to keep the combined flag so that we have the option to load the inclusion, non-inclusion and combined subsets of provingkeys separately
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i think this is an implementation detail that we can address in a follow-up pr. wdyt?
No description provided.