RE: By carefull with account history index, it is not reliable

[holger80]

You are right, I will add this to the beem docu. I think the solution is to use an index which is calculated from the block number, trx index, the operation index and an virtual op index.

Posted using Partiko Android

Comments

[leprechaun]

We expect index numbers to be:

1. complete. We hope to see all the ops that are going to the blockchain.
2. sequential: That is operation n+1 never happens before operation n. Although n+1 and n may happen at the same time. And if n+1 exists then n should exist. Things happen at the same time when they are part of the same transaction and may happen at the same time when they are in the same block.
3. consistent. We should get the same values and order no matter which host we use (at least within the context of the same blockchain).

Now, #3 is broken because of something outside of scope of Beem. I don't think you should put too much time into working around something that is probably a bug. Documenting that this natural assumption (#3) is wrong (hopefully temporarily), is a good idea, though.

If you are going to give the API users #1 #2 #3 by calculating and deciding on a order in a way that is independent of the Steem RPC node, then we could continue to use the history index number as a key to our transactions we store in our app's database's.