Suggestion to use the transactionLogIndex instead of the block logIndex in the action ID

[PaulRBerg]

@razgraf, @gavriliumircea

See my StackExchange post to understand the difference between logIndex and transactionLogIndex.

The idea is to use transactionLogIndex instead of logIndex in the Action.id because:

• The logIndex is the index of the log in the block.
• The transactionLogIndex is the index of the log in the transaction.
• The id already includes the tx hash, so it makes sense to contain an index that is specifically related to the tx.
• In this way, the ID would contain more relevant information.

Related:

• Please document the fields in your Ethereum types graphprotocol/graph-tooling#2037
• Consider renaming Event.logIndex to Event.blockLogIndex graphprotocol/graph-tooling#2038

[razgraf]

As mentioned before, some of these changes that replace rather than append could affect the reliability of the API. Not saying this one shouldn't be implemented, but can we include an "impact analysis" of these suggestions in the OP, to make sure we're not causing trouble by changing things?

[PaulRBerg]

I think the impact analysis is implicit in the explanation provided in each separate proposal, and upon how the GraphQL schema is queried — the latter is knowledge that I don't have because I have only recently learned how the indexers repo is structured.

in this case, changing the IDs should be fine because we should not be querying actions by IDs.

In general, we don't have that many integrators, anyway. Introducing non-backwards compatible changes is fine. It's progress. In the long term, making breaking changes is inevitable.