Open Gozala opened 2 months ago
Yeah, so I see value on
which is probably not something we would want to do if content is already available (on some storage node), so perhaps extending execution flow to cover such scenario might be a good idea.
but I do not mind making address required for now. Also, this is internal and not affecting client as far as I can tell, sxo we won't need to coordinate client updates
Per https://github.com/web3-storage/w3up/pull/1342#discussion_r1562048241
Spec declares
address
field in theblob/allocate
receipt as optional, but then in thehttp/put
awaits on theaddress.url
andaddress.headers
which is means that task will fail whenaddress
is omitted, which consequently will failblob/accept
which depends onhttp/put
.We should either
address
required to prevent cascading failures when field is omitted.address
is not present.In the implementation PR @vasco-santos made point that in the future allocation would imply finding candidate storage nodes and allocating space with them, which is probably not something we would want to do if content is already available (on some storage node), so perhaps extending execution flow to cover such scenario might be a good idea.
On the other hand we could just make field required and come back to the updated flow when are doing candidate storage node selections.