-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
Make get_add_orders_for_transaction public and remove orderbook_address param #2501
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
Open
findolor
wants to merge
2
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
2026-03-10-public-add-orders
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Local DB is still effectively single-orderbook, so this loop can duplicate or miss results.
When
query_source(chain_id)selectsLocalDb, iterating every configured orderbook here is not safe yet. The local DB stack still indexes only one orderbook per chain, andfetch_ordersstill uses a single hardcoded orderbook filter underneath. On a chain with multiple configured orderbooks, this branch can therefore either repeat the same indexed order for each iteration or time out for orders that belong to a non-indexed orderbook, with no subgraph fallback on this path.Based on learnings,
sync_databasecurrently only supports indexing a single orderbook per chain ID, andfetch_orders/query.sqlstill hardcodes a singleorderbook_addressbecause multiorderbook local DB support is planned for a future PR.Also applies to: 93-116
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No duplicates — the SQL filters by
orderbook_addressviaIN ({list}), so each iteration queries a distinct orderbook. The subgraph path requires separate calls per endpoint, so the loop is necessary there.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🧩 Analysis chain
🏁 Script executed:
Length of output: 1101
🏁 Script executed:
Length of output: 7444
🏁 Script executed:
Length of output: 2823
@findolor, you're right — I was mistaken. Looking at the code, each iteration callsget_added_by_tx_hashwith a distinctorderbook_address, and the SQL applies it via the/*MAIN_ORDERBOOKS_CLAUSE*/template placeholder. Since each call is scoped to a different orderbook, results are disjoint and there is no duplication. The loop is correct for both the LocalDb and Subgraph paths.Also, the learning I had about
fetch_orders/query.sqlhardcoding a single orderbook address is now stale. I'll remove it.⛔ Learnings removed
🧠 Learnings used