Skip to content
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

Ignore incoming pending transactions when sync mode is blockchair #649

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 18, 2024

Conversation

omurovch
Copy link
Member

This is because in blockchair sync mode we don't sync all the blocks after the checkpoint. Instead, we only sync blocks where blockchair says we have a transaction. Thus, if we receive an incoming transaction "A" which is replaced by another transaction "B" (that sends funds to another wallet) in the mempool, we won't receive "B" from blockchair (because it's not related to any of our addresses), and so "A" is left in 'pending' state on our list of transactions. A 'pending' transaction is left forever, and the user may think the funds are still on the way, whereas in fact, they were sent to another wallet.

 This is because in blockchair sync mode we don't sync all the blocks after the checkpoint. Instead, we only sync blocks where blockchair says we have a transaction. Thus, if we receive an incoming transaction "A" which is replaced by another transaction "B" (that sends funds to another wallet) in the mempool, we won't receive "B" from blockchair (because it's not related to any of our addresses), and so "A" is left in 'pending' state on our list of transactions. A 'pending' transaction is left forever, and the user may think the funds are still on the way, whereas in fact, they were sent to another wallet.
@omurovch omurovch merged commit 35cdb3e into master Mar 18, 2024
1 check passed
@omurovch omurovch deleted the fix branch March 18, 2024 09:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants