kayabaNerve
commented
4 years ago This is incorrect. We do have the following block, which is proper:
#Verify the included packets.
for packet in result[0].body.packets:
#Verify the predecessors of every Transaction are already mentioned on the chain OR also in this Block.
var tx: Transaction
try:
tx = manager.functions.transactions.getTransaction(packet.hash)
except IndexError as e:
panic("Couldn't get a Transaction we're confirmed to have: " & e.msg)
if not ((tx of Claim) or ((tx of Data) and cast[Data](tx).isFirstData)):
for input in tx.inputs:
if not (manager.functions.consensus.hasArchivedPacket(input.hash) or includedTXs.contains(input.hash)):
raise newLoggedException(ValueError, "Block's Transactions have predecessors which have yet to be mentioned on chain.")My confusion was from the following block's error message:
#Make sure we have already added every input.
if not first:
for input in tx.inputs:
try:
discard manager.functions.transactions.getTransaction(input.hash)
#This TX is missing an input.
except IndexError:
#Look for the input in the pending Transactions.
if transactions.hasKey(input.hash):
#If it's there, add this Transaction to be handled later.
todo[tx.hash] = tx
break thisTX
else:
raise newLoggedException(ValueError, "Block includes Verifications of a Transaction which has not had all its inputs mentioned in previous blocks/this block.")If this was the only check, it would count Transactions in our mempool as mentioned. That said, this error is accurate; it just requires the other block to be comprehensive.
getTransaction solely says we have the Transaction, not any Verifications.
Discovered while working on #233. While it is related, that shouldn't be the cause. getBlockTemplate explicitly doesn't include TXs which don't have mentioned/mentionable parents, which is confirmed by a e2e test. If they weren't in RAM, they would have been synced. If they were, the VP would still be applied.