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 not using zkapp_command_logic #248

Open
L-as opened this issue Jan 7, 2025 · 1 comment
Open

Consider not using zkapp_command_logic #248

L-as opened this issue Jan 7, 2025 · 1 comment

Comments

@L-as
Copy link
Collaborator

L-as commented Jan 7, 2025

It's horribly complex, albeit I haven't found any bugs in it yet.

It also has much lower throughput than possible for account updates without proofs.
For account updates with proofs of course we can't really raise the throughput without a lot of unpractical work.

We could feasibly cover most zkapp commands in a single proof (given that we can verify 2 proofs recursively at a time).

@L-as
Copy link
Collaborator Author

L-as commented Jan 7, 2025

We could allow the user to wrap up zkapp proofs in exchange for lower fees.
You could accumulate pending zkapp verifications into a merkle tree (or similar) and then verify only one recursive proof for the whole thing.

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant