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

starknet_getTransactionReceipt response doesn't conform to the 0.7.1 spec #1805

Closed
fracek opened this issue Apr 8, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #2078
Closed

starknet_getTransactionReceipt response doesn't conform to the 0.7.1 spec #1805

fracek opened this issue Apr 8, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #2078
Assignees

Comments

@fracek
Copy link

fracek commented Apr 8, 2024

I noticed that in some cases the response to starknet_getTransactionReceipt doesn't follow the spec for RPC 0.7.1.

For example the following request on mainnet

{
	"id": 0,
	"jsonrpc": "2.0",
	"method": "starknet_getTransactionReceipt",
	"params": ["0x6b1e0c9f74d338fe8d992a6a67307275e9be9e311bfe5297c43bfd4ef16069e"]
}

Returns the following response

{
	"jsonrpc": "2.0",
	"result": {
		"type": "INVOKE",
		"transaction_hash": "0x6b1e0c9f74d338fe8d992a6a67307275e9be9e311bfe5297c43bfd4ef16069e",
		"actual_fee": {
			"amount": "0x1106f22bd5d36",
			"unit": "WEI"
		},
		"execution_status": "SUCCEEDED",
		"finality_status": "ACCEPTED_ON_L1",
		"block_hash": "0x2bf7e9abd8b35622f7bfdb8c7a8379766f80bd4e7009b146acb2ced0004d44c",
		"block_number": 500000,
		"messages_sent": [],
		"events": [/* skip events */],
		"execution_resources": {
			"steps": 36134,
			"memory_holes": 9031,
			"pedersen_builtin_applications": 67,
			"range_check_builtin_applications": 2241,
			"bitwise_builtin_applications": 29,
			"segment_arena_builtin": 6
		}
	},
	"id": 0
}

Notice how the execution_resources.data_availability field is missing, but it's marked as required in the spec.

@Eikix
Copy link

Eikix commented Aug 19, 2024

This bug is breaking Kakarot testnet, could we help speed up the fix process?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
3 participants