Does it stuck if send a nonce gaped set-code-tx that has the same auth&from?

[rekyyang]

if a gap-nonce-tx with same from&auth arrived first time, checkDelegationLimit would return at line-618, because this tx has gaped nonce, it couldn't be executed.

And if I want to replace it, checkDelegationLimit would return ErrOutOfOrderTxFromDelegated because it has no pending

And if I want to fix the gap, because the from & the auth has the same address, checkDelegationLimit would return ErrInflightTxLimitReached?

[rjl493456442]

Sorry I don't quite understand your question.

If the sender has delegation or pending authorization, the nonce-gapped tx will be rejected in the first place. Why do you want to replace it?

[rekyyang]

sorry, I misunderstand the code... I'll close this ticket

[rekyyang]

sorry, I test this case and there are some questions I want to ask 🙏

My test case is (disable local tx):

1. prepare a account A without auth, nonce is 0
2. send a tx from A, and auth a contract to A, tx nonce is 3, auth nonce is 4 （this tx will be queued）
3. I can only send nonce 0 1 2 tx to fill the gap ONE BY ONE, but I cannot replace the first nonce 3 gapped auth tx directly
   Is it expected? If I send a gaped auth tx with a large gap, I have to wait the tx expire or fill the gap one by one(by the way, I mean I cannot send a bunch of txs to fill the gap one time)

[rjl493456442]

Sorry for the late reply.

It is not expected (at least under normal circumstances) to send a transaction with a gapped nonce and authorization.

This situation can occur if users send multiple transactions simultaneously, and the one requiring authorization arrives earlier.

It is allowed to send an executable transaction even if there is a queued transaction pending authorization; no deadlock will occur.

So yes, we have added some additional restrictions for the account has delegation or pending authorization. And in your case you have to fill the nonce gap one by one.

[rjl493456442]

Feel free to reopen if you have any other questions!