-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat(iota-framework): replace storage_fund with storage deposits #960
feat(iota-framework): replace storage_fund with storage deposits #960
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good. You linked issue #938 but that issue is not fixed by this PR.
crates/iota-framework/packages/iota-system/sources/storage_deposits.move
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
// At the beginning there's no object in the storage yet | ||
storage_balance: initial_balance, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If there's no object in storage at the beginning, shouldn't it be initialized as storage_balance: 0
, then, instead of with the parameter?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Implementation has been changed
Sorry, I got the numbers mixed up |
…s in storage_fund. Removing rebates from the total_object_storage_rebates Putting refundable charges into total_object_storage_rebates Putting non-refundable charges (which are gonna be 0 for now if we set the refund rate to 100%) into non_refundable_balance
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There are hundreds of results in the codebase when searching for the string "storage_fund"
. Do you want to update all of them in this PR, or do it later in a pure-rename only PR? I think the latter is preferable, to keep the logic changes separate from the name changes, but we need to keep track of this issue somewhere.
I suppose we have to deal with it in the same way as |
crates/iota-framework/packages/iota-system/sources/iota_system_state_inner.move
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…nto scl1/replace-storage-fund-with-storage-deposits
…nto scl1/replace-storage-fund-with-storage-deposits
…nto scl1/replace-storage-fund-with-storage-deposits
…nto scl1/replace-storage-fund-with-storage-deposits
Description of change
Replacing storage_fund with storage deposits
Increase storage_rebate_rate to 100%
Removing rebates from the total_object_storage_rebates
Putting refundable charges into total_object_storage_rebates
Putting non-refundable charges (which are gonna be 0 for now if we set the refund rate to 100%) into non_refundable_balance
Links to any relevant issues
fixes #939 and #948 .
Type of change
Choose a type of change, and delete any options that are not relevant.
How the change has been tested
Run tests - kinesis/crates/iota-framework/packages/iota-system