fix: change inner AddressPrioQueue

[giladchase]

• pop_front in Vec is O(n).
• should be private to protect invariant.

---

This change is 

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 10 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 74.29%. Comparing base (50d38f0) to head (e2cc261).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
crates/mempool/src/priority_queue.rs	0.00%	10 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #240      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   74.78%   74.29%   -0.49%     
==========================================
  Files          23       23              
  Lines         916      922       +6     
  Branches      916      922       +6     
==========================================
  Hits          685      685              
- Misses        187      193       +6     
  Partials       44       44              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[MohammadNassar1]

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @ayeletstarkware and @giladchase)

---

crates/mempool/src/priority_queue.rs line 67 at r1 (raw file):

// Assumption: Transactions are provided in the correct order.
#[derive(Default)]
pub struct AddressPriorityQueue(VecDeque<ThinTransaction>);

I believe we should use a HashMap<Nonce, ThinTransaction>, as @elintul also suggested. This will support nonce gaps, which will be added soon

Code quote:

VecDeque

[MohammadNassar1]

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @ayeletstarkware and @giladchase)

---

crates/mempool/src/priority_queue.rs line 67 at r1 (raw file):

// Assumption: Transactions are provided in the correct order.
#[derive(Default)]
pub struct AddressPriorityQueue(VecDeque<ThinTransaction>);

I think it's not a good name.
These transactions are not priority transactions.

Code quote:

 AddressPriorityQueue

[ayeletstarkware]

Reviewed all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @elintul and @giladchase)

---

crates/mempool/src/priority_queue.rs line 67 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, MohammadNassar1 (mohammad-starkware) wrote…

I believe we should use a HashMap<Nonce, ThinTransaction>, as @elintul also suggested. This will support nonce gaps, which will be added soon

Why not implement this in the future or the next version?

[giladchase]

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @elintul and @MohammadNassar1)

---

crates/mempool/src/priority_queue.rs line 67 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, ayeletstarkware (Ayelet Zilber) wrote…

Why not implement this in the future or the next version?

Already fixed on Ayelet's PR, if i change it here as well she'll hit a conflict

---

crates/mempool/src/priority_queue.rs line 67 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, MohammadNassar1 (mohammad-starkware) wrote…

I think it's not a good name.
These transactions are not priority transactions.

Already fixed on Ayelet's PR, if i change it here as well she'll hit a conflict

[ayeletstarkware]

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @elintul and @MohammadNassar1)

[MohammadNassar1]

Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @giladchase)