By using this site, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Accept
World of SoftwareWorld of SoftwareWorld of Software
  • News
  • Software
  • Mobile
  • Computing
  • Gaming
  • Videos
  • More
    • Gadget
    • Web Stories
    • Trending
    • Press Release
Search
  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Advertise
  • Contact
Copyright © All Rights Reserved. World of Software.
Reading: SSZ-QL: A Guide to Querying Ethereum’s BeaconState Using Offsets, Proofs, and G-Indexes | HackerNoon
Share
Sign In
Notification Show More
Font ResizerAa
World of SoftwareWorld of Software
Font ResizerAa
  • Software
  • Mobile
  • Computing
  • Gadget
  • Gaming
  • Videos
Search
  • News
  • Software
  • Mobile
  • Computing
  • Gaming
  • Videos
  • More
    • Gadget
    • Web Stories
    • Trending
    • Press Release
Have an existing account? Sign In
Follow US
  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Advertise
  • Contact
Copyright © All Rights Reserved. World of Software.
World of Software > Computing > SSZ-QL: A Guide to Querying Ethereum’s BeaconState Using Offsets, Proofs, and G-Indexes | HackerNoon
Computing

SSZ-QL: A Guide to Querying Ethereum’s BeaconState Using Offsets, Proofs, and G-Indexes | HackerNoon

News Room
Last updated: 2025/11/16 at 2:01 PM
News Room Published 16 November 2025
Share
SSZ-QL: A Guide to Querying Ethereum’s BeaconState Using Offsets, Proofs, and G-Indexes | HackerNoon
SHARE

Today, consensus clients cannot easily provide individual pieces of data from the BeaconState together with the proofs needed to verify them. Ethereum’s Light Client system defines some proof paths, but there is no universal or standard way for clients to generate or serve these proofs. Downloading the entire BeaconState is not realistic—the state for slot 12,145,344 is around 271 MB, which is too large to send over the network quickly and puts unnecessary load on both the node and the user. The spec even warns that the debug endpoints used for fetching full states are meant only for diagnostics, not real-world use.

A much better solution is to use Merkle proofs or multiproofs, which allow the provider to send only a very small, verifiable part of the state. This is especially useful because most of the state size comes from validators (~232 MB) and balances (~15 MB); the rest of the fields are about ~24 MB. If a user needs only one small field, it’s wasteful to download the entire 271 MB state. Instead, a Merkle proof can deliver just the requested leaf plus its authentication path—usually only a few kilobytes.

Because of this, we need a general and standardized way for clients to request only the data they need, along with the proof required to verify it. This reduces bandwidth, reduces CPU load, and replaces today’s scattered and custom implementations (for example, Nimbus’s special handling of historical_summaries).

This work is also important for the future of Ethereum. SSZ is becoming more central to the protocol: Pureth (EIP-7919) proposes replacing RLP with SSZ, and the upcoming beam chain (also called the lean chain) will leverage SSZ as its only serialization format. So building a clean, efficient, and standard method for proof-based data access is a key step toward future protocol upgrades.

Proposed Solution: Introducing the SSZ Query Language (SSZ-QL)

The idea of SSZ-QL was originally proposed by Etan Kissling. His main question was straightforward but powerful:

“What if we had a standard way to request any SSZ field — together with a Merkle proof — directly from any consensus client?”

Today, consensus clients do not offer a general or standardized method to request specific SSZ data with proofs. Some ad-hoc solutions exist (for example, Nimbus’ basic queries used by the verifying web3signer), but there is no proper, universal SSZ query language available—and certainly nothing ready at the time this idea was written.

Etan’s proposal describes what an SSZ Query Language should allow:

  • Requesting any subtree inside an SSZ object
  • Choosing whether a field should be fully expanded or returned only as a hashtreeroot
  • Filtering (for example, finding a transaction with a certain root)
  • Using back-references (e.g., retrieving the receipt at the same index as a matching transaction)
  • Specifying where the proof should be anchored
  • Supporting forward compatibility so clients can safely ignore unknown future fields

This kind of API could be used by both consensus and execution clients. With forward-compatible SSZ types (like those from EIP-7495), request and response structures can even be generated automatically.

Building on this idea, the proposed solution by Jun and Fernando, who are developing this as part of their EPF project in prysm, is to add a new Beacon API endpoint that supports SSZ Query Language (SSZ-QL). This endpoint lets users fetch exactly the SSZ data they need—no more, no less—together with a Merkle proof that verifies its correctness. The initial version will offer a minimal but practical feature set, which already covers most real use cases. (The draft API specification is available for review.)

Beyond this minimal version, also plan to create a full SSZ-QL specification. This expanded version will support advanced features such as filtering, requesting data ranges, and choosing custom anchor points, all with Merkle proofs included. They intend to propose this richer specification for inclusion in the official consensus specifications, and an early draft is already available for review.

Understanding Generalized Indexes (GI) Before Diving Into SSZ-QL

In SSZ, every object — including the entire BeaconState — is represented as a binary Merkle tree. n A generalized index (GI) is simply a number that uniquely identifies any node inside this tree.

The rules are very simple:

  • Root node has generalized index: n GI = 1
  • For any node with index i: n left child = 2*i, n right child = 2*i + 1

So the whole tree is numbered like:

               GI:1
           /           
      GI:2             GI:3
     /               /     
  GI:4   GI:5      GI:6    GI:7
    ...

This numbering makes Merkle proofs easy. If you know the generalized index of a leaf, you know exactly where it sits in the tree and which sibling hashes must be included to verify it.

Example with Beacon State:

0  GenesisTime                   string
1  GenesisValidatorsRoot         string
2  Slot                          string
3  Fork                          *Fork
4  LatestBlockHeader             *BeaconBlockHeader
5  BlockRoots                    []string
6  StateRoots                    []string
7  HistoricalRoots               []string
8  Eth1Data                      *Eth1Data
9  Eth1DataVotes                 []*Eth1Data
10 Eth1DepositIndex              string
11 Validators                    []*Validator             ← (p = 11)
12 Balances                      []string
13 RandaoMixes                   []string
14 Slashings                     []string
15 PreviousEpochAttestations     []*pendingAttestation
16 CurrentEpochAttestations      []*pedningAttestation
17 JustificationBits             string
18 PreviousJustifiedCheckpoint   *Checkpoint
19 CurrentJustifiedCheckpoint    *Checkpoint
20 FinalizedCheckpoint           *Checkpoint

There are 21 top-level fields (indexed 0..20). To place these into a Merkle tree, SSZ pads them up to the next power of two (32).

n 32 leaves → depth = 5. n Top-level leaves occupy the GI range:

32 ... 63

We compute the GI for a top-level field using:

Formula:

GI_top = 2^depth + field_index

For .validators, field index = 11

So: n GI_validators = 2^5 + 11 = 32 + 11 = 43.

This GI (43) is the leaf commitment of the entire validator’s subtree inside the global BeaconState tree.

Multi-Level Proof: Example With validators[42].withdrawal_credentials

Now, suppose we want a proof for:

BeaconState.validators[42].withdrawal_credentials

This requires two levels of proof:

  1. Prove that the entire validator’s subtree is included in the BeaconState root

    We already know:

  • Top-level GI for validators = 43

    Using GI 43, the consensus client collects the sibling hashes on the path from leaf 43 up to root (e.g., GI 43 → 21 → 10 → 5 → 2 → 1).

    This gives the proof:

   validators_root  ---> BeaconState_root

  1. Prove that validator[42].withdrawal_credentials is inside the validator’s subtree

    Now treat the validators list as its own Merkle tree.

    Inside this subtree:

  • Validator 42 is the 42-nd element → it maps to some leaf index (e.g. chunk k) inside this subtree.

  • Withdrawal credentials lives inside one of the 32-byte SSZ chunks of validator #42 (for example chunk k = 128 — number doesn’t matter, just concept).

    We now generate:

     leaf (withdrawal_credentials chunk)
        ---> validators_root
    

    by collecting sibling hashes inside the local validator-subtree.

    Final Combined Proof

    You end up with:

   1. Local Level Proof
      Proves
      withdrawal_credentials --> validator_root
   2. Top-level branch proof
      Proves
      validator_root --> BeaconState_root

A verifier can now reconstruct the BeaconState root from only:

  • the requested leaf

  • the two lists of sibling nodes

  • the known BeaconState root

    No full state download needed.

                        ┌───────────────────────────────┐
                        │         BeaconState Root      │
                        └───────────────────────────────┘
                                      ▲
                                      │  (Top-level Merkle Proof)
                                      │  Sibling hashes for GI = 43
                                      │
                      ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
                      │    validators_root (GI = 43)            │
                      └─────────────────────────────────────────┘
                                      ▲
                                      │  (Local Subtree Proof)
                                      │  Proof inside validators list
                                      │  for index = 42
                                      │
           ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
           │      Validator[42] Subtree (list element #42)           │ 
           └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
                                      ▲
                                      │  (Field-level Merkle Proof)
                                      │  Sibling hashes inside the
                                      │  validator struct
                                      │
       ┌──────────────────────────────────────────┐
       │ validator[42].withdrawal_credentials     │  ← requested field
       └──────────────────────────────────────────┘

Understanding SSZ Serialization Before Computing Generalized Indices

To compute a correct generalized index, you must first understand how SSZ serializes and merklizes different data types. n Generalized indices don’t exist in isolation—they are derived from the shape of the Merkle tree, and the shape of the tree depends entirely on how SSZ interprets the underlying Go struct fields.

In SSZ, each field can only be one of two categories:

  1. Base Types (fixed-size values)

    uint64, Bytes32, Bytes20, uint256 etc. These are straightforward — they always serialize into a fixed number of bytes.

  2. Composite Types

    Container (like BeaconState), Vector[T, N] (fixed length), List[T, N] (variable length), Bitvector[N], Bitlist[N] And each of them is serialized in a slightly different way.

    To compute a generalized index (g-index) for any field inside a state, the SSZ tree must first know how that field is serialized. This is why the generated *.pb.go files include tags such as:

ssz-size:"8192,32"   → Vector
ssz-max:"16"         → List
ssz-size:"?,32"      → List of Vector

To compute a generalized index for any field, we must first understand the SSZ structure of the object:

  • which fields exist,
  • whether each field is a List or Vector,
  • how many chunks each field occupies,
  • and how nested types should be traversed.

This is exactly what the AnalyzeObject function does in Prysm, located at encoding/ssz/query/analyzer.go

// AnalyzeObject analyzes given object and returns its SSZ information.
func AnalyzeObject(obj SSZObject) (*SszInfo, error) {
    value := reflect.ValueOf(obj)

    info, err := analyzeType(value, nil)
    if err != nil {
        return nil, fmt.Errorf("could not analyze type %s: %w", value.Type().Name(), err)
    }

    // Populate variable-length information using the actual value.
    err = PopulateVariableLengthInfo(info, value)
    if err != nil {
        return nil, fmt.Errorf("could not populate variable length info for type %s: %w", value.Type().Name(), err)
    }

    return info, nil
}

What analyzeType Does

analyzeType is the function that examines a Go value using reflection and figures out what kind of SSZ type it is. It is a pure type-analysis step — it does not depend on the actual runtime values, only on the Go type and the struct tags.

When you give it a field or struct, it:

  • Checks the Go kind (uint, struct, slice, pointer, etc.)
  • Reads SSZ-related struct tags like ssz-size and ssz-max
  • Decides whether this field is:
  • a basic SSZ type (uint64, uint32, bool)
  • a Vector (ssz-size:"N")
  • a List (ssz-max:"N")
  • a Bitvector / Bitlist
  • a Container (struct)
  • Builds an SszInfo record that describes:
  • the SSZ type (List, Vector, Container…)
  • whether it is fixed-sized or variable-sized
  • offsets of fields (for Containers)
  • nested SSZ information for child fields

Think of analyzeType as the function that scans the type definition and produces a static SSZ layout blueprint for this type.

What PopulateVariableLengthInfo Does

While analyzeType studies the type, some SSZ objects cannot be fully described without the actual value. n

Examples:

  • Lists ([]T) need to know their current length
  • Variable-sized container fields need their actual offset
  • Nested lists need each element’s actual size

PopulateVariableLengthInfo fills in this missing runtime information.

It:

  • Looks at the SszInfo blueprint created by analyzeType
  • Looks at the actual value of the object passed
  • Computes values that can only be known at runtime:
  • length of Lists
  • sizes of nested variable elements
  • offsets of variable-sized fields inside Containers
  • bitlist length from bytes

It processes everything recursively — for example, a Container with a List containing structs with Lists will all be filled in.

Think of PopulateVariableLengthInfo as the function that takes the blueprint from analyzeType and fills in the real measurements based on the actual value you pass.

Example:

Let’s test this function with a passing BeaconState struct

type BeaconState struct {
    state                       protoimpl.MessageState                                           `protogen:"open.v1"`
    GenesisTime                 uint64                                                           `protobuf:"varint,1001,opt,name=genesis_time,json=genesisTime,proto3" json:"genesis_time,omitempty"`
    GenesisValidatorsRoot       []byte                                                           `protobuf:"bytes,1002,opt,name=genesis_validators_root,json=genesisValidatorsRoot,proto3" json:"genesis_validators_root,omitempty" ssz-size:"32"`
    Slot                        github_com_OffchainLabs_prysm_v7_consensus_types_primitives.Slot `protobuf:"varint,1003,opt,name=slot,proto3" json:"slot,omitempty" cast-type:"github.com/OffchainLabs/prysm/v7/consensus-types/primitives.Slot"`
    Fork                        *Fork                                                            `protobuf:"bytes,1004,opt,name=fork,proto3" json:"fork,omitempty"`
    LatestBlockHeader           *BeaconBlockHeader                                               `protobuf:"bytes,2001,opt,name=latest_block_header,json=latestBlockHeader,proto3" json:"latest_block_header,omitempty"`
    BlockRoots                  [][]byte                                                         `protobuf:"bytes,2002,rep,name=block_roots,json=blockRoots,proto3" json:"block_roots,omitempty" ssz-size:"8192,32"`
    StateRoots                  [][]byte                                                         `protobuf:"bytes,2003,rep,name=state_roots,json=stateRoots,proto3" json:"state_roots,omitempty" ssz-size:"8192,32"`
    HistoricalRoots             [][]byte                                                         `protobuf:"bytes,2004,rep,name=historical_roots,json=historicalRoots,proto3" json:"historical_roots,omitempty" ssz-max:"16777216" ssz-size:"?,32"`
    Eth1Data                    *Eth1Data                                                        `protobuf:"bytes,3001,opt,name=eth1_data,json=eth1Data,proto3" json:"eth1_data,omitempty"`
    Eth1DataVotes               []*Eth1Data                                                      `protobuf:"bytes,3002,rep,name=eth1_data_votes,json=eth1DataVotes,proto3" json:"eth1_data_votes,omitempty" ssz-max:"2048"`
    Eth1DepositIndex            uint64                                                           `protobuf:"varint,3003,opt,name=eth1_deposit_index,json=eth1DepositIndex,proto3" json:"eth1_deposit_index,omitempty"`
    Validators                  []*Validator                                                     `protobuf:"bytes,4001,rep,name=validators,proto3" json:"validators,omitempty" ssz-max:"1099511627776"`
    Balances                    []uint64                                                         `protobuf:"varint,4002,rep,packed,name=balances,proto3" json:"balances,omitempty" ssz-max:"1099511627776"`
    RandaoMixes                 [][]byte                                                         `protobuf:"bytes,5001,rep,name=randao_mixes,json=randaoMixes,proto3" json:"randao_mixes,omitempty" ssz-size:"65536,32"`
    Slashings                   []uint64                                                         `protobuf:"varint,6001,rep,packed,name=slashings,proto3" json:"slashings,omitempty" ssz-size:"8192"`
    PreviousEpochAttestations   []*PendingAttestation                                            `protobuf:"bytes,7001,rep,name=previous_epoch_attestations,json=previousEpochAttestations,proto3" json:"previous_epoch_attestations,omitempty" ssz-max:"4096"`
    CurrentEpochAttestations    []*PendingAttestation                                            `protobuf:"bytes,7002,rep,name=current_epoch_attestations,json=currentEpochAttestations,proto3" json:"current_epoch_attestations,omitempty" ssz-max:"4096"`
    JustificationBits           github_com_OffchainLabs_go_bitfield.Bitvector4                   `protobuf:"bytes,8001,opt,name=justification_bits,json=justificationBits,proto3" json:"justification_bits,omitempty" cast-type:"github.com/OffchainLabs/go-bitfield.Bitvector4" ssz-size:"1"`
    PreviousJustifiedCheckpoint *Checkpoint                                                      `protobuf:"bytes,8002,opt,name=previous_justified_checkpoint,json=previousJustifiedCheckpoint,proto3" json:"previous_justified_checkpoint,omitempty"`
    CurrentJustifiedCheckpoint  *Checkpoint                                                      `protobuf:"bytes,8003,opt,name=current_justified_checkpoint,json=currentJustifiedCheckpoint,proto3" json:"current_justified_checkpoint,omitempty"`
    FinalizedCheckpoint         *Checkpoint                                                      `protobuf:"bytes,8004,opt,name=finalized_checkpoint,json=finalizedCheckpoint,proto3" json:"finalized_checkpoint,omitempty"`
    unknownFields               protoimpl.UnknownFields
    sizeCache                   protoimpl.SizeCache
}
package main

import (
    "fmt"

    "github.com/OffchainLabs/prysm/v7/encoding/ssz/query"
    eth "github.com/OffchainLabs/prysm/v7/proto/prysm/v1alpha1"
)

func main() {

    v := &eth.BeaconState{}
    // Analyze it with Prysm’s existing SSZ analyzer
    info, _ := query.AnalyzeObject(v)

    fmt.Println(info.Print())
}

Output:

BeaconState (Variable-size / size: 2687377)
├─ genesis_time (offset: 0) uint64 (Fixed-size / size: 8)
├─ genesis_validators_root (offset: 8) Bytes32 (Fixed-size / size: 32)
├─ slot (offset: 40) Slot (Fixed-size / size: 8)
├─ fork (offset: 48) Fork (Fixed-size / size: 16)
│  ├─ previous_version (offset: 0) Bytes4 (Fixed-size / size: 4)
│  ├─ current_version (offset: 4) Bytes4 (Fixed-size / size: 4)
│  └─ epoch (offset: 8) Epoch (Fixed-size / size: 8)
├─ latest_block_header (offset: 64) BeaconBlockHeader (Fixed-size / size: 112)
│  ├─ slot (offset: 0) Slot (Fixed-size / size: 8)
│  ├─ proposer_index (offset: 8) ValidatorIndex (Fixed-size / size: 8)
│  ├─ parent_root (offset: 16) Bytes32 (Fixed-size / size: 32)
│  ├─ state_root (offset: 48) Bytes32 (Fixed-size / size: 32)
│  └─ body_root (offset: 80) Bytes32 (Fixed-size / size: 32)
├─ block_roots (offset: 176) Vector[Bytes32, 8192] (Fixed-size / size: 262144)
├─ state_roots (offset: 262320) Vector[Bytes32, 8192] (Fixed-size / size: 262144)
├─ historical_roots (offset: 2687377) List[Bytes32, 16777216] (Variable-size / length: 0, size: 0)
├─ eth1_data (offset: 524468) Eth1Data (Fixed-size / size: 72)
│  ├─ deposit_root (offset: 0) Bytes32 (Fixed-size / size: 32)
│  ├─ deposit_count (offset: 32) uint64 (Fixed-size / size: 8)
│  └─ block_hash (offset: 40) Bytes32 (Fixed-size / size: 32)
├─ eth1_data_votes (offset: 2687377) List[Eth1Data, 2048] (Variable-size / length: 0, size: 0)
├─ eth1_deposit_index (offset: 524544) uint64 (Fixed-size / size: 8)
├─ validators (offset: 2687377) List[Validator, 1099511627776] (Variable-size / length: 0, size: 0)
├─ balances (offset: 2687377) List[uint64, 1099511627776] (Variable-size / length: 0, size: 0)
├─ randao_mixes (offset: 524560) Vector[Bytes32, 65536] (Fixed-size / size: 2097152)
├─ slashings (offset: 2621712) Vector[uint64, 8192] (Fixed-size / size: 65536)
├─ previous_epoch_attestations (offset: 2687377) List[PendingAttestation, 4096] (Variable-size / length: 0, size: 0)
├─ current_epoch_attestations (offset: 2687377) List[PendingAttestation, 4096] (Variable-size / length: 0, size: 0)
├─ justification_bits (offset: 2687256) Bitvector[8] (Fixed-size / size: 1)
├─ previous_justified_checkpoint (offset: 2687257) Checkpoint (Fixed-size / size: 40)
│  ├─ epoch (offset: 0) Epoch (Fixed-size / size: 8)
│  └─ root (offset: 8) Bytes32 (Fixed-size / size: 32)
├─ current_justified_checkpoint (offset: 2687297) Checkpoint (Fixed-size / size: 40)
│  ├─ epoch (offset: 0) Epoch (Fixed-size / size: 8)
│  └─ root (offset: 8) Bytes32 (Fixed-size / size: 32)
└─ finalized_checkpoint (offset: 2687337) Checkpoint (Fixed-size / size: 40)
   ├─ epoch (offset: 0) Epoch (Fixed-size / size: 8)
   └─ root (offset: 8) Bytes32 (Fixed-size / size: 32)

In the SSZ analyzer output, the offset shown for each field represents the exact byte position where that field begins when the entire struct is serialized according to SSZ rules. SSZ serialization lays out all fixed-size fields first, tightly packed one after another, and the offset tells you where each of these fields starts within that packed byte stream. For example, in the line root (offset: 8) Bytes32 (Fixed-size / size: 32), the field root is a 32-byte fixed-size value, and its serialized bytes begin at position 8 in the SSZ-encoded byte array. The size indicates how many bytes the field contributes to the serialized output (32 bytes in this case). For fixed-size types, the size is predetermined, while for variable-size types, the analyzer computes the size based on the actual value. Together, the offset and size show exactly how the SSZ layout is organized in memory when the struct is serialized.

Example: Finding the Merkle Leaf for a Field Using the Offset

Let’s take a real field from the SSZ Analyzer Output:

├─ fork (offset: 48) Fork (Fixed-size / size: 16)
│  ├─ previous_version (offset: 0) Bytes4 (Fixed-size / size: 4)
│  ├─ current_version  (offset: 4) Bytes4 (Fixed-size / size: 4)
│  └─ epoch            (offset: 8) Epoch  (Fixed-size / size: 8)

We want to prove the field:

fork.epoch

The “fork” field in BeaconState starts at offset 48 in the serialized byte stream.

Inside fork, the epoch field starts at offset 8 (relative to the start of Fork).

So:

absolute_offset = base_offset_of_fork + offset_of_epoch_inside_fork
absolute_offset = 48 + 8 = 56 bytes

fork.epoch begins at byte 56 of the full serialized BeaconState.

SSZ divides serialization into 32-byte chunks:

  • Chunk 0 → bytes 0–31
  • Chunk 1 → bytes 32–63
  • Chunk 2 → bytes 64–95
  • …

Now find which chunk contains byte 56:

chunk_index = floor(56 / 32) = 1

So:

The leaf containing fork.epoch is Leaf / Chunk 1.

fork.epoch is an 8-byte integer

Within chunk 1 (bytes 32–63):

local_offset = 56 - 32 = 24

So inside the 32-byte leaf, the bytes look like:

[ 0 … 23 ] → unrelated fields  
[ 24 … 31 ] → fork.epoch (8 bytes)

To prove this value, you:

  1. Take chunk 1 → this is your leaf.
  2. When hashing up the tree, at each level:
  • If chunk is a left child → record the right sibling hash.
  • If chunk is a right child → record the left sibling hash.
  1. Continue until you reach the top Merkle root.

The collected sibling hashes form your:

➡ SSZ Merkle proof branch for fork.epoch

Anyone can verify this by recomputing:

hash_tree_root(leaf + all_siblings) == state_root

This introduces two new endpoints that expose the initial version of SSZ Query Language (SSZ-QL) in Prysm:

/prysm/v1/beacon/states/{state_id}/query

/prysm/v1/beacon/blocks/{block_id}/query

Both endpoints follow the SSZ-QL endpoint specification and allow clients to request specific fields inside a BeaconState or BeaconBlock using a query string. The server returns the requested SSZ field encoded as raw SSZ bytes. For now, at the time of writing this, the feature supports only a single query per request, and the include_proof flag is ignored — the PR always returns responses without Merkle proofs.

The request structure is:

type SSZQueryRequest struct {
    Query        string `json:"query"`
    IncludeProof bool   `json:"include_proof,omitempty"`
}

And both endpoints return an SSZ-encoded response of this form:

type SSZQueryResponse struct {
    state         protoimpl.MessageState `protogen:"open.v1"`
    Root          []byte                 `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=root,proto3" json:"root,omitempty" ssz-size:"32"`
    Result        []byte                 `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=result,proto3" json:"result,omitempty" ssz-max:"1073741824"`
    unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
    sizeCache     protoimpl.SizeCache
}

For the full specification and examples, you can refer to this link

For now, the implementation locates the requested field using the computed offset and size information from the SSZ analyzer, rather than using a generalized index.

:::tip
For more information, you can check out Jun Song’s work — implemented together with Fernando as part of their EPF project in prysm.

:::

Sign Up For Daily Newsletter

Be keep up! Get the latest breaking news delivered straight to your inbox.
By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Use and acknowledge the data practices in our Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe at any time.
Share This Article
Facebook Twitter Email Print
Share
What do you think?
Love0
Sad0
Happy0
Sleepy0
Angry0
Dead0
Wink0
Previous Article 5 Hidden iOS 26 Features That Are Actually Useful – BGR 5 Hidden iOS 26 Features That Are Actually Useful – BGR
Next Article iRobot Roomba is Mashable readers’ favorite robot vacuum brand, according to survey iRobot Roomba is Mashable readers’ favorite robot vacuum brand, according to survey
Leave a comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Stay Connected

248.1k Like
69.1k Follow
134k Pin
54.3k Follow

Latest News

How Search Engines Reinforce Gender Gaps in Political Representation | HackerNoon
How Search Engines Reinforce Gender Gaps in Political Representation | HackerNoon
Computing
How to Clear Cloud Storage: iCloud & Other Services
How to Clear Cloud Storage: iCloud & Other Services
News
Google Cloud Greater China President Kathy Lee reportedly stepping down; Microsoft veteran Bin Shen tapped as successor · TechNode
Google Cloud Greater China President Kathy Lee reportedly stepping down; Microsoft veteran Bin Shen tapped as successor · TechNode
Computing
OnePlus 15 launches globally, but there’s some bad news for US availability
OnePlus 15 launches globally, but there’s some bad news for US availability
News

You Might also Like

How Search Engines Reinforce Gender Gaps in Political Representation | HackerNoon
Computing

How Search Engines Reinforce Gender Gaps in Political Representation | HackerNoon

13 Min Read
Google Cloud Greater China President Kathy Lee reportedly stepping down; Microsoft veteran Bin Shen tapped as successor · TechNode
Computing

Google Cloud Greater China President Kathy Lee reportedly stepping down; Microsoft veteran Bin Shen tapped as successor · TechNode

2 Min Read
Are Women Visible Enough Online? An Analysis of Gender Representation in Google Image Search Results | HackerNoon
Computing

Are Women Visible Enough Online? An Analysis of Gender Representation in Google Image Search Results | HackerNoon

11 Min Read
TSMC halts supply of 7nm and below AI chips to mainland China · TechNode
Computing

TSMC halts supply of 7nm and below AI chips to mainland China · TechNode

3 Min Read
//

World of Software is your one-stop website for the latest tech news and updates, follow us now to get the news that matters to you.

Quick Link

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of use
  • Advertise
  • Contact

Topics

  • Computing
  • Software
  • Press Release
  • Trending

Sign Up for Our Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!

World of SoftwareWorld of Software
Follow US
Copyright © All Rights Reserved. World of Software.
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Lost your password?