You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
After refactoring waitForTransaction on v5.23.0, it is possible now to lower timeout to 1s and gain ~x2.5 performance.
However, some contract tests still failed at this speed.
This feature needs more testing / communicating with nodes regarding the "Readiness" status for TX.
At the moment even though the transaction status is SUCCEEDED and ACCEPTED_ON_L2 pending block nodes are not ready to work with the contract/transaction.
Investigate for contract do we need to check that the latest block, instead of pending?
For transactions why txHash is unknown if the status is SUCCEEDED and ACCEPTED_ON_L2 on pending Block
Describe the solution you'd like
Lower RPC retryInterval to 1000 ms.
Describe alternatives you've considered
A clear and concise description of any alternative solutions or features you've considered.
Additional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
After refactoring waitForTransaction on v5.23.0, it is possible now to lower timeout to 1s and gain ~x2.5 performance.
However, some contract tests still failed at this speed.
This feature needs more testing / communicating with nodes regarding the "Readiness" status for TX.
At the moment even though the transaction status is SUCCEEDED and ACCEPTED_ON_L2 pending block nodes are not ready to work with the contract/transaction.
Investigate for contract do we need to check that the latest block, instead of pending?
For transactions why txHash is unknown if the status is SUCCEEDED and ACCEPTED_ON_L2 on pending Block
Describe the solution you'd like
Lower RPC retryInterval to 1000 ms.
Describe alternatives you've considered
A clear and concise description of any alternative solutions or features you've considered.
Additional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: