You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
While it is true that the miner no longer receives a reward for mining the block, theeth_getBlockByNumber routine continues to return a miner field. (In the case illustrated in the referenced issue, "miner": "0x57865ba267d48671a41431f471933aec32a7c7d1").
For our application, we use trace_block to find "every appearance of every address anywhere on the chain". By removing the miner from trace_block post-merge, the node now requires that we call the RPC twice for each block. Once (against trace_block) for all the regular address and once (against eth_getBlockByNumber) for the miner. This doubles our processing time when indexing the entire chain.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@tjayrush Question mark does it makes sense to be included there as a 0 value reward? I am in doubt it does. The miner still does get all the fees so it should be there. I see that Erigon implemented it, though that doesn't make it right thing to do.
There's a positive reason to keep it as it reports addresses that are "involved: in the block even if there is no reward. Our application wants every appearance of every address. This is one of them.
The same behaviour happens on Erigon (please see this issue: erigontech/erigon#5462).
While it is true that the miner no longer receives a reward for mining the block, the
eth_getBlockByNumber
routine continues to return aminer
field. (In the case illustrated in the referenced issue, "miner": "0x57865ba267d48671a41431f471933aec32a7c7d1").For our application, we use
trace_block
to find "every appearance of every address anywhere on the chain". By removing the miner fromtrace_block
post-merge, the node now requires that we call the RPC twice for each block. Once (againsttrace_block
) for all theregular
address and once (againsteth_getBlockByNumber
) for theminer
. This doubles our processing time when indexing the entire chain.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: