[fastx client] Sender Local State Still Holds Transferred Object

[oxade]

TLDR:
Transferring an object still retains the object within the sender's object_ids records.
Is this expected? Can we simply wipe the local record after sending?

Example: based on enhancements in #91

Store two account addresses for use

mbp> ACCOUNT1=`./client --committee committee.json --accounts accounts.json query-accounts-addrs | head -n 1`
mbp> ACCOUNT2=`./client --committee committee.json --accounts accounts.json query-accounts-addrs | tail -n -1`

Get the objects for this account (sender) by checking its local view of its object_ids. See impl for getting own objects: https://github.com/MystenLabs/fastnft/pull/91/files#diff-6e566db7624762b34cc7884f7a5cce3e9825cf696dfe1806fe9a6a094e11aacdR456

mbp> ./client --committee committee.json --accounts accounts.json query-objects "$ACCOUNT1"

0x5a495cfb1d1b38c7bf94cdc58539cc66: SequenceNumber(0)
0x91ba3cb52d6b3067dce87572c91db097: SequenceNumber(0)
0xb42238a512eae64e17ced7436931cfc6: SequenceNumber(0)
0xe8779bda58fdd370881ef99ffbb9dad4: SequenceNumber(0)

Get the objects for this account (recipient) by checking its local view of its object_ids

mbp> ./client --committee committee.json --accounts accounts.json query-objects "$ACCOUNT2"

0x02682009b51e0b15eca544447c3d6f60: SequenceNumber(0)
0x532a8c8d4500468016e706d273e3e357: SequenceNumber(0)
0x605b840990609db1a63121a01cb17579: SequenceNumber(0)
0x8a91b430eae5edf93492320815059b68: SequenceNumber(0)

Store the objects available for sender in ACCOUNT1_OBJECT1

mbp> ACCOUNT1_OBJECT1=`./client --committee committee.json --accounts accounts.json query-objects "$ACCOUNT1" | head -n 1 |  awk -F: '{ print $1 }'`

Transfer ACCOUNT1_OBJECT1 from ACCOUNT1 to ACCOUNT2

mbp> ./client --committee committee.json --accounts accounts.json transfer "$ACCOUNT1_OBJECT1" --from "$ACCOUNT1" --to "$ACCOUNT2"

[2021-12-30T01:41:35Z INFO  client] Starting transfer
[2021-12-30T01:41:35Z INFO  client] Transfer confirmed after 3388 us
CertifiedOrder { order: Order { kind: Transfer(Transfer { sender: AZAhx6VlS+S/q2ObEyHCEuyPH06qcnZqKyR5xkX6wTk=, recipient: FastPay(/+2qSQ3PKSDmEjaqppXwJoDEjMBMrizDree5gdAFPIE=), object_id: 5A495CFB1D1B38C7BF94CDC58539CC66, sequence_number: SequenceNumber(0), user_data: UserData(None) }), signature: sxBJKBnF+KB0hW93x9SjMsnQw1G2z2ifwo9Q8Yl6EzCylZQqARZ86ABp6dJ/Gq/TJHV40Lrooc02s4HDUX0rDQ== }, signatures: [(qzIYFVQQ272wf3xNxWUvYellgrL+Oo1VMxv+VcCDKmw=, XIL2Za+ee0aExhuKMGZWEPBNUB3SNsH6uXZ/j/4BvtqGJFVuGPJFHHju+86Q0mR/tjmVsRoqwoSMkQ466g29CA==), (dLMfEfRDC6Mu+yyB9u9RWiY7KvuIOiiH+/NUc7hERkQ=, jB93zCkkAx43MjTeSkuApQdjPj/VGkFWdRGheMlZgbfX8VbpVZiHt9uWpq3vpqCbnXeoNvMH5NdRfQGC9z4jAw==), (YicAzMw7SsOtTmU3VIOFoXFAokj3GwEgYJ+ZaH/hTUU=, rUAJaCFCfuqpcWyRPdIZcenFoSUM7nOzieeqJeDPUvHnFpca3sQy7ZvpVNgbI2htAhEk9P0rWpUjfX9E+nFsDg==)] }
[2021-12-30T01:41:35Z INFO  client] Updating recipient's local balance
[2021-12-30T01:41:35Z INFO  client] Saved user account states

Check ACCOUNT2 objects state. Has the new object and seq number is updated

mbp> ./client --committee committee.json --accounts accounts.json query-objects "$ACCOUNT2"

0x02682009b51e0b15eca544447c3d6f60: SequenceNumber(0)
0x532a8c8d4500468016e706d273e3e357: SequenceNumber(0)
0x5a495cfb1d1b38c7bf94cdc58539cc66: SequenceNumber(1)     <----------- New account has the object
0x605b840990609db1a63121a01cb17579: SequenceNumber(0)
0x8a91b430eae5edf93492320815059b68: SequenceNumber(0)

Check ACCOUNT1 objects state. Still has old object, but seq number is updated

mbp> ./client --committee committee.json --accounts accounts.json query-objects "$ACCOUNT1"

0x5a495cfb1d1b38c7bf94cdc58539cc66: SequenceNumber(1)      <----------- Old account also has object in its object_ids
0x91ba3cb52d6b3067dce87572c91db097: SequenceNumber(0)
0xb42238a512eae64e17ced7436931cfc6: SequenceNumber(0)
0xe8779bda58fdd370881ef99ffbb9dad4: SequenceNumber(0)

[patrickkuo]

Agree, I think we should update the local copy once the owner changed

[gdanezis]

0x5a495cfb1d1b38c7bf94cdc58539cc66: SequenceNumber(1) <----------- Old account also has object in its object_ids

Is this just a question of filtering out objects that are not owned by this user when producing this list?

[oxade]

0x5a495cfb1d1b38c7bf94cdc58539cc66: SequenceNumber(1) <----------- Old account also has object in its object_ids

Is this just a question of filtering out objects that are not owned by this user when producing this list?

@gdanezis that's one way to do it at query time, which we'll need when syncing for recvd objects anyways.
But is it wrong to just pop the object from the local copy list after a TX?
I'm asking because idk if the algorithm is designed around the list being append-only or something.

[oxade]

Agree, I think we should update the local copy once the owner changed

@patrickkuo should I fix this? Or do you wanna do it as part of your enhancements to get_own_objects?

[patrickkuo]

it's a small fix, I can include it in my PR, the "transferred" object_id should be safe to remove as the client don't really need it locally anymore, one question I have is do we prune the certificates as well or not...

[oxade]

it's a small fix, I can include it in my PR, the "transferred" object_id should be safe to remove as the client don't really need it locally anymore, one question I have is do we prune the certificates as well or not...

Okay, if it's small, I can wait or cherry pick it.
What do you mean by prune certs?

[sblackshear]

I think this is fixed based on what I saw in the demo--please reopen if not!