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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

adding cache for oracle responses, batch promise resolution #155

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 12, 2024
Merged

adding cache for oracle responses, batch promise resolution #155

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 12, 2024

Conversation

nikhilkumar1612
Copy link
Contributor

Description

  • batch promise resolve.
  • caching layer for oracle responses.

Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce?

  • Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • Documentation Update
  • Code style update (formatting, renaming)
  • Refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes)
  • Build related changes
  • Other (please describe):

Further comments (optional)

Screenshot 2024-12-12 at 2 41 09 PM Screenshot 2024-12-12 at 2 45 03 PM Screenshot 2024-12-12 at 11 09 20 AM Screenshot 2024-12-12 at 12 01 58 PM

@linear Linear
Copy link

linear bot commented Dec 12, 2024

PRO-2911 arka pm_getERC20TokenQuotes improvements

ch4r10t33r
ch4r10t33r approved these changes Dec 12, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@ch4r10t33r ch4r10t33r left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

backend/src/paymaster/index.ts
}
for (let i = 0; i < tokens_list.length; i++) {
const promises = [];
for(let i=0;i<tokens_list.length;i++) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

for loop is synchronous, no? can't we replace this with token_list.forEach instead?

@nikhilkumar1612 nikhilkumar1612 merged commit 9682e8a into master Dec 12, 2024
4 checks passed
@nikhilkumar1612 nikhilkumar1612 deleted the PRO-2911 branch December 12, 2024 12:47
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@ch4r10t33r ch4r10t33r ch4r10t33r approved these changes

@vignesha22 vignesha22 Awaiting requested review from vignesha22

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@nikhilkumar1612 @ch4r10t33r