SIP: Finalized State Contexts for RPC - #74
Draft
davidrotari19 wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
Conversation
davidrotari19
changed the title
davidrotari19
changed the title
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
This proposal introduces
Finalized State Contexts, a Protobuf value that lets clients carry a lower bound on finalized state visibility acrossRPCrequests before checkpoint processing completes. A context contains a certified checkpoint anchor and a frontier of finalized transaction digests. A service that accepts a context must either evaluate the operation against state containing its finalized effects or Return a structured error. It must never silently use older state.Motivation
Sui can finalize transaction effects before those effects become visible through checkpoint based reads. Clients currently address this gap through checkpoint waiting, retries, or affinity to one node. Those mechanisms add latency or do not provide a portable consistency guarantee. This matters when a successor transaction must be constructed after observing a finalized predecessor, when another party must authorize the next step, when parallel transaction branches must be joined, or when a newly published package must be used immediately.