Closed lexnv closed 7 months ago
This PR is a followup of the proposal from: https://github.com/paritytech/json-rpc-interface-spec/pull/150#pullrequestreview-1988787293
In this PR, the concept of limits is removed from the transactionWatch, as noted in: https://github.com/paritytech/json-rpc-interface-spec/pull/150.
transactionWatch
Transaction::Dropped
cc @paritytech/subxt-team @tomaka
I don't really understand the need to combine these two widely different things in a single PR?
That makes sense, thanks for the review! 🙏
Have broken this down into:
This PR is a followup of the proposal from: https://github.com/paritytech/json-rpc-interface-spec/pull/150#pullrequestreview-1988787293
In this PR, the concept of limits is removed from the
transactionWatch
, as noted in: https://github.com/paritytech/json-rpc-interface-spec/pull/150.Transaction::Dropped
if the node cannot keep up with the number of transactions (as per spec), however servers are not required to support a minimum of 4 subscriptions per clientcc @paritytech/subxt-team @tomaka