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

Consider removing the commit-reveal checks in OperationProcessor. #29

Open
thehenrytsai opened this issue May 27, 2020 · 2 comments
Open
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@thehenrytsai
Copy link
Contributor

Technically, the commit-reveal checks is already performed by Resolver because it builds the commit-reveal lookup map, so the commit-reveal checks in OperationProcessor is current redundant.

One could make a case to remove these checks in OperationProcessor from the performance standpoint. One could also make a case to keep it from the design standpoint that OperationProcessor should not know the implementation details of the Resolver.

@thehenrytsai thehenrytsai added the enhancement New feature or request label May 27, 2020
@csuwildcat
Copy link
Member

I think this is the right move, because you're never going to build the commit reveal chain on ingest anyway, so there's no real benefit there, right?

@thehenrytsai
Copy link
Contributor Author

thehenrytsai commented May 28, 2020

To be clear, OperationProcessor is not the same as Observer. Observer is an ingest component, instances of OperationProcessor are not, they are the "processing engines" if you will, used in resolution for applying operations to derive the final DID state.

@decentralgabe decentralgabe transferred this issue from decentralized-identity/sidetree Mar 14, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants