Use reference input

[paweljakubas]

• update ApiMinBurnFromInput to accommodate policy id
• update swagger and spec
• regenerate golden and make sure unit tests pass
• incorporate new ApiMinBurnData inside constructTransaction
• introduce ScriptSource
• handle from input case to mkUnsignedTx
• adjust mkUnsignedTx
• show the case in integration testing`

Comments

builds on top of #4086

Issue Number

adp-3090

[Anviking]

This seems like it's assuming each reference input points to an inline script which requires 1 key witness? Otherwise I don't understand it.

What if the script requires two key witnesses?

[paweljakubas]

if there is reference input(s) then each reference input refers to tx where script was published. Each script has structure : [cosigner#0, timelocks] and it means it contains policy key. We use ONE policy key per wallet, which means there is going to be ONE witness from this or ZERO. So Whatever number of reference inputs,one witness with wallet's policy signing key is going to be used.

Remember that we are here in SHELLEY and script regulates minting/burning. So yes, we will only have ONE cosigner. In shared style it would be different but atm we are not supporting minting/burning for shared wallets.

[HeinrichApfelmus]

In the presence of Plutus validator scripts, the number of extra witnesses can arbitrarily depend on the data in the reference inputs, so the estimate can always fail terribly in principle.

But even in the absence of Plutus validator scripts, I think that the presence of reference inputs alone is not a good basis for estimation. 🤔 What about combining this with Cardano.txMintValue? The logic being that if the transaction mints something, and there is a reference input, then the most likely of that input is to contain a script which requires one additional witness.

      case Cardano.txInsReference txbodycontent of
          Cardano.TxInsReferenceNone -> 0
          Cardano.TxInsReference{} ->
              case CardanotxMintValue txbodycontent of
                  Cardano.TxMintValueNone -> 0
                  Cardano.TxMintValue{} -> 1

[paweljakubas]

thanks! Very good suggestion! Adopted!

[HeinrichApfelmus]

Thanks for your work! 😊 I have two requests that I would like to see addressed, but good to go afterwards.

[HeinrichApfelmus]

Could you change this to check for the status of the transaction instead, like we discussed some time ago for another integration test? (I forgot which one)

I.e. instead of checking whether a balance has increased, we check whether this particular transactions has been accepted into the ledger by querying the getTransaction endpoint with the transaction id and waiting until the status is in_ledger.

[paweljakubas]

ah, yes. done

[HeinrichApfelmus]

Thanks! 😊