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

[3.2] Add Support For Json Snapshots sans Nodeos options #112

Merged
merged 22 commits into from
Sep 8, 2022

Conversation

ClaytonCalabrese
Copy link
Contributor

It was desired to have a PR created for the JSON Snapshot changes without the Nodeos changes.

This PR adds:
Test cases for JSON snapshots.
A json snapshot reader
A converter from bin snapshot to json snapshot.

This PR Does not include:
Nodeos options to use the reader or converter

heifner and others added 22 commits July 20, 2022 11:21
…erge snapshot and jsonsnapshot code handling
…d of adding a new option. Improved memory usage so current WAX snapshot can be supported. Modified the JSON output so that table rows are an array which reduces file size and memory usage. Put rapidjson inside an eosio_rapidjson namespace to avoid ODR issues. Change CMakeLists to not compile rapidjson but only include it as it is a header only library.
…ent possible collision. Rename rapidjson in libraries.
@ClaytonCalabrese ClaytonCalabrese self-assigned this Sep 7, 2022
@heifner heifner changed the title Add Support For Json Snapshots sans Nodeos options [3.2] Add Support For Json Snapshots sans Nodeos options Sep 7, 2022
@heifner heifner added the OCI Work exclusive to OCI team label Sep 7, 2022
@heifner
Copy link
Member

heifner commented Sep 7, 2022

Related PRs #24 #25

@ClaytonCalabrese ClaytonCalabrese merged commit c18ed8f into main Sep 8, 2022
@ClaytonCalabrese ClaytonCalabrese deleted the json_snapshot_minus_nodeos branch September 8, 2022 18:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
OCI Work exclusive to OCI team
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants