feat(rawdb): skip freezers #220
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
RodrigoVillar
commented
Sep 2, 2025
ARR4N
requested changes
Sep 2, 2025
ARR4N
approved these changes
Sep 3, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Why this should be merged
As described in ava-labs/coreth#1137, database inspection of a Coreth chain database fails because
InspectDatabase()expects for freezers to be used. This PR fixes this bug by adding an option to skip freezer inspection.This PR should be followed with a downstream PR in Coreth to pass in an option to skip freezer inspection during database inspection.
How this works
Extends
inspectDatabaseConfigwith askipFreezersfield and adds the associated option function for it.How this was tested
CI + ran
InspectDatabase()against Coreth locally