mirror of
https://github.com/corda/corda.git
synced 2024-12-25 07:31:10 +00:00
187 lines
7.2 KiB
ReStructuredText
187 lines
7.2 KiB
ReStructuredText
Transactions
|
|
============
|
|
|
|
.. topic:: Summary
|
|
|
|
* *Transactions are proposals to update the ledger*
|
|
* *A transaction proposal will only be committed if:*
|
|
|
|
* *It doesn't contain double-spends*
|
|
* *It is contractually valid*
|
|
* *It is signed by the required parties*
|
|
|
|
.. only:: htmlmode
|
|
|
|
Video
|
|
-----
|
|
.. raw:: html
|
|
|
|
<iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/213879807" width="640" height="360" frameborder="0" webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen></iframe>
|
|
<p></p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overview
|
|
--------
|
|
Corda uses a *UTXO* (unspent transaction output) model where every state on the ledger is immutable. The ledger
|
|
evolves over time by applying *transactions*, which update the ledger by marking zero or more existing ledger states
|
|
as historic (the *inputs*) and producing zero or more new ledger states (the *outputs*). Transactions represent a
|
|
single link in the state sequences seen in :doc:`key-concepts-states`.
|
|
|
|
Here is an example of an update transaction, with two inputs and two outputs:
|
|
|
|
.. image:: resources/basic-tx.png
|
|
:scale: 25%
|
|
:align: center
|
|
|
|
A transaction can contain any number of inputs and outputs of any type:
|
|
|
|
* They can include many different state types (e.g. both cash and bonds)
|
|
* They can be issuances (have zero inputs) or exits (have zero outputs)
|
|
* They can merge or split fungible assets (e.g. combining a $2 state and a $5 state into a $7 cash state)
|
|
|
|
Transactions are *atomic*: either all the transaction's proposed changes are accepted, or none are.
|
|
|
|
There are two basic types of transactions:
|
|
|
|
* Notary-change transactions (used to change a state's notary - see :doc:`key-concepts-notaries`)
|
|
* General transactions (used for everything else)
|
|
|
|
Transaction chains
|
|
------------------
|
|
When creating a new transaction, the output states that the transaction will propose do not exist yet, and must
|
|
therefore be created by the proposer(s) of the transaction. However, the input states already exist as the outputs of
|
|
previous transactions. We therefore include them in the proposed transaction by reference.
|
|
|
|
These input states references are a combination of:
|
|
|
|
* The hash of the transaction that created the input
|
|
* The input's index in the outputs of the previous transaction
|
|
|
|
This situation can be illustrated as follows:
|
|
|
|
.. image:: resources/tx-chain.png
|
|
:scale: 25%
|
|
:align: center
|
|
|
|
These input state references link together transactions over time, forming what is known as a *transaction chain*.
|
|
|
|
Committing transactions
|
|
-----------------------
|
|
Initially, a transaction is just a **proposal** to update the ledger. It represents the future state of the ledger
|
|
that is desired by the transaction builder(s):
|
|
|
|
.. image:: resources/uncommitted_tx.png
|
|
:scale: 25%
|
|
:align: center
|
|
|
|
To become reality, the transaction must receive signatures from all of the *required signers* (see **Commands**, below). Each
|
|
required signer appends their signature to the transaction to indicate that they approve the proposal:
|
|
|
|
.. image:: resources/tx_with_sigs.png
|
|
:scale: 25%
|
|
:align: center
|
|
|
|
If all of the required signatures are gathered, the transaction becomes committed:
|
|
|
|
.. image:: resources/committed_tx.png
|
|
:scale: 25%
|
|
:align: center
|
|
|
|
This means that:
|
|
|
|
* The transaction's inputs are marked as historic, and cannot be used in any future transactions
|
|
* The transaction's outputs become part of the current state of the ledger
|
|
|
|
Transaction validity
|
|
--------------------
|
|
Each required signers should only sign the transaction if the following two conditions hold:
|
|
|
|
* **Transaction validity**: For both the proposed transaction, and every transaction in the chain of transactions
|
|
that created the current proposed transaction's inputs:
|
|
|
|
* The transaction is digitally signed by all the required parties
|
|
* The transaction is *contractually valid* (see :doc:`key-concepts-contracts`)
|
|
|
|
* **Transaction uniqueness**: There exists no other committed transaction that has consumed any of the inputs to
|
|
our proposed transaction (see :doc:`key-concepts-consensus`)
|
|
|
|
If the transaction gathers all the required signatures but these conditions do not hold, the transaction's outputs
|
|
will not be valid, and will not be accepted as inputs to subsequent transactions.
|
|
|
|
Other transaction components
|
|
----------------------------
|
|
As well as input states and output states, transactions contain:
|
|
|
|
* Commands
|
|
* Attachments
|
|
* Time-Window
|
|
|
|
For example, a transaction where Alice pays off £5 of an IOU with Bob using a £5 cash payment, supported by two
|
|
attachments and a time-window, may look as follows:
|
|
|
|
.. image:: resources/full-tx.png
|
|
:scale: 25%
|
|
:align: center
|
|
|
|
We explore the role played by the remaining transaction components below.
|
|
|
|
Commands
|
|
^^^^^^^^
|
|
.. raw:: html
|
|
|
|
<iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/213881538" width="640" height="360" frameborder="0" webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen></iframe>
|
|
<p></p>
|
|
|
|
Suppose we have a transaction with a cash state and a bond state as inputs, and a cash state and a bond state as
|
|
outputs. This transaction could represent two different scenarios:
|
|
|
|
* A bond purchase
|
|
* A coupon payment on a bond
|
|
|
|
We can imagine that we'd want to impose different rules on what constitutes a valid transaction depending on whether
|
|
this is a purchase or a coupon payment. For example, in the case of a purchase, we would require a change in the bond's
|
|
current owner, whereas in the case of a coupon payment, we would require that the ownership of the bond does not
|
|
change.
|
|
|
|
For this, we have *commands*. Including a command in a transaction allows us to indicate the transaction's intent,
|
|
affecting how we check the validity of the transaction.
|
|
|
|
Each command is also associated with a list of one or more *signers*. By taking the union of all the public keys
|
|
listed in the commands, we get the list of the transaction's required signers. In our example, we might imagine that:
|
|
|
|
* In a coupon payment on a bond, only the owner of the bond is required to sign
|
|
* In a cash payment, only the owner of the cash is required to sign
|
|
|
|
We can visualize this situation as follows:
|
|
|
|
.. image:: resources/commands.png
|
|
:scale: 25%
|
|
:align: center
|
|
|
|
Attachments
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
.. raw:: html
|
|
|
|
<iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/213879328" width="640" height="360" frameborder="0" webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen></iframe>
|
|
<p></p>
|
|
|
|
Sometimes, we have a large piece of data that can be reused across many different transactions. Some examples:
|
|
|
|
* A calendar of public holidays
|
|
* Supporting legal documentation
|
|
* A table of currency codes
|
|
|
|
For this use case, we have *attachments*. Each transaction can refer to zero or more attachments by hash. These
|
|
attachments are ZIP/JAR files containing arbitrary content. The information in these files can then be
|
|
used when checking the transaction's validity.
|
|
|
|
Time-window
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
In some cases, we want a transaction proposed to only be approved during a certain time-window. For example:
|
|
|
|
* An option can only be exercised after a certain date
|
|
* A bond may only be redeemed before its expiry date
|
|
|
|
In such cases, we can add a *time-window* to the transaction. Time-windows specify the time window during which the
|
|
transaction can be committed. We discuss time-windows in the section on :doc:`key-concepts-time-windows`.
|