Tweak block indexing to use height as the primary key #4757
Conversation
This file contains 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
Every block has a unique height, we almost always want to join with other tables based on block height, the serial ID has no meaning: ergo, we should get rid of the id, and just use height as the primary key. There was no index on height either, which would have made joining on it slow. Also removed unwraps and expects and as in favor of actual errors.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Every block has a unique height, we almost always want to join with other tables based on block height, the serial ID has no meaning: ergo, we should get rid of the id, and just use height as the primary key.
There was no index on height either, which would have made joining on it slow.
Also removed unwraps and expects and as in favor of actual errors.
Checklist before requesting a review
If this code contains consensus-breaking changes, I have added the "consensus-breaking" label. Otherwise, I declare my belief that there are not consensus-breaking changes, for the following reason: