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

Handle proxies in log parsing #48

Open
askeluv opened this issue Jan 27, 2020 · 1 comment
Open

Handle proxies in log parsing #48

askeluv opened this issue Jan 27, 2020 · 1 comment
Labels
contract parsing enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@askeluv
Copy link
Member

askeluv commented Jan 27, 2020

Background:
Quite a few contracts are proxies for a separate ("target") address, and in many cases we can't parse the event logs of these in the same way as we normally do.

Example: https://etherscan.io/address/0x49d716DFe60b37379010A75329ae09428f17118d

The above example run through the Contract Parser doesn't yield the events of the target address that we expect.

However, when pasting in the target contract 0x5d6bdeb18ba6e2be5cb87c7cfaee9cd07d000428, we get the set of events we are interested in.

But the target's BQ SQL doesn't yield any events! When we use the BQ generated for the target address, and the address for the proxy contract, we get the result we want.

Proposed solution:
Add a (possibly null) "proxy" field which when non-empty overrides the address field in our SQL template.

@medvedev1088
Copy link
Member

medvedev1088 commented Jan 29, 2020

The proposed solution makes sense. Additional metadata will serve as extra documentation.

An alternative is to put the target address to contract_address in table definition. It won't require changes but we lose the proxy/non-proxy metadata. @askeluv is my understanding correct?

@allenday allenday added contract parsing enhancement New feature or request labels May 18, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
contract parsing enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants