Commit d8fa0208 authored by WorldDogs's avatar WorldDogs Committed by GitHub

Update derivation.md

In the existing implementation, it seems that a batch corresponds to multiple L2 blocks.
parent 8b392e9b
...@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ To derive the L2 blocks in an epoch `E`, we need the following inputs: ...@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ To derive the L2 blocks in an epoch `E`, we need the following inputs:
is the sequencing window size (note that this means that epochs are overlapping). In particular, we need: is the sequencing window size (note that this means that epochs are overlapping). In particular, we need:
- The [batcher transactions][g-batcher-transaction] included in the sequencing window. These allow us to - The [batcher transactions][g-batcher-transaction] included in the sequencing window. These allow us to
reconstruct [sequencer batches][g-sequencer-batch] containing the transactions to include in L2 blocks (each batch reconstruct [sequencer batches][g-sequencer-batch] containing the transactions to include in L2 blocks (each batch
maps to a single L2 block). maps to multiple L2 blocks).
- Note that it is impossible to have a batcher transaction containing a batch relative to epoch `E` on L1 block - Note that it is impossible to have a batcher transaction containing a batch relative to epoch `E` on L1 block
`E`, as the batch must contain the hash of L1 block `E`. `E`, as the batch must contain the hash of L1 block `E`.
- The [deposits][g-deposits] made in L1 block `E` (in the form of events emitted by the [deposit - The [deposits][g-deposits] made in L1 block `E` (in the form of events emitted by the [deposit
......
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment