Daml Triggers - Off-Ledger Automation in Daml¶

In addition to the actual Daml logic which is uploaded to the Ledger and the UI, Daml applications often need to automate certain interactions with the ledger. This is commonly done in the form of a ledger client that listens to the transaction stream of the ledger and when certain conditions are met, e.g., when a template of a given type has been created, the client sends commands to the ledger to create a template of another type.

It is possible to write these clients in a language of your choice, such as JavaScript, using the HTTP JSON API. However, that introduces an additional layer of friction: you now need to translate between the template and choice types in Daml and a representation of those Daml types in the language you are using for your client. Daml triggers address this problem by allowing you to write certain kinds of automation directly in Daml, reusing all the Daml types and logic that you have already defined. Note that, while the logic for Daml triggers is written in Daml, they act like any other ledger client: they are executed separately from the ledger, they do not need to be uploaded to the ledger and they do not allow you to do anything that any other ledger client could not do.

If you don’t want to follow along, but still want to get the final code for this section to play with, you can get it by running:

daml new --template=gsg-trigger gsg-trigger


It is tempting to think of Daml Triggers as snippets of code that “react to ledger events”. However, this is not the best way to think about them; while it will work in some cases, in many corner cases that line of thought will lead to subtle errors.

Instead, you should think of, and write, your triggers from the perspective of “correcting the current ACS” to match some predefined expectations. Trigger rules should be a combination of checking those expectations on the current ACS and applyin corrective actions to bring back the ACS in line with its expected state.

The “trigger” part is best thought of as an optimization: rather than check the ACS constantly, we only apply our rules when something happens that we believe _may_ lead to the state of the ledger diverging from our expectations.

Sample Trigger¶

Our example for this tutorial builds upon the Getting Started Guide, specifically picking up right after the Your First Feature section.

We assume that our requirements are to build a chatbot that reponds to every message with:

That should fool anyone and pass the Turing test, easily.

As explained above, while the layman description may be “responds to every message”, our technical description is better phrased as “ensure that, at all times, the last message we can see has been sent by us; if that is not the case, the corrective action is to send a response to the last message we can see”.

Daml Trigger Basics¶

A Daml trigger is a regular Daml project that you can build using daml build. To get access to the API used to build a trigger, you need to add the daml-trigger library to the dependencies field in daml.yaml:

dependencies:
- daml-prim
- daml-stdlib
- daml-trigger


Note: In the specific case of the Getting Started Guide, this is already included as part of the create-daml-app template.

In addition to that you also need to import the Daml.Trigger module in your own code.

Daml triggers automatically track the active contract set (ACS), i.e., the set of contracts that have been created and have not been archived, and the commands in flight for you. In addition to that, they allow you to have user-defined state that is updated based on new transactions and command completions. For our chatbot trigger, the ACS is sufficient, so we will simply use () as the type of the user defined state.

To create a trigger you need to define a value of type Trigger s where s is the type of your user-defined state:

data Trigger s = Trigger
{ initialize : TriggerInitializeA s
, updateState : Message -> TriggerUpdateA s ()
, rule : Party -> TriggerA s ()
, registeredTemplates : RegisteredTemplates
, heartbeat : Optional RelTime
}


To clarify, this is the definition in the Daml.Trigger library, reproduced here for illustration purposes. This is not something you need to add to your own code.

The initialize function is called on startup and allows you to initialize your user-defined state based on querying the active contract set.

The updateState function is called on new transactions and command completions and can be used to update your user-defined state based on the ACS and the transaction or completion. Since our Daml trigger does not have any interesting user-defined state, we will not go into details here.

The rule function is the core of a Daml trigger. It defines which commands need to be sent to the ledger based on the party the trigger is executed at, the current state of the ACS, and the user defined state. The type TriggerA allows you to emit commands that are then sent to the ledger, query the ACS with query, update the user-defined state, as well as retrieve the commands in flight with getCommandsInFlight. Like Scenario or Update, you can use do notation and getTime with TriggerA.

We can specify the templates that our trigger will operate on. In our case, we will simply specify AllInDar which means that the trigger will receive events for all template types defined in the DAR. It is also possible to specify an explicit list of templates. For example, to specify just the Message template, one would write:

...
registeredTemplates = RegisteredTemplates [registeredTemplate @Message],
...


This is mainly useful for performance reasons if your DAR contains many templates that are not relevant for your trigger. Note that providing an explicit list of templates also filters the result of querying the ACS using the Trigger API: contracts of the excluded templates cannot be queried.

Finally, you can specify an optional heartbeat interval at which the trigger will be sent a MHeartbeat message. This is useful if you want to ensure that the trigger is executed at a certain rate to issue timed commands. We will not be using heartbeats in this example.

Running a No-Op Trigger¶

To implement a no-op trigger, one could write the following in a separate daml/ChatBot.daml file:

module NoOp where

import qualified Daml.Trigger as T

noOp : T.Trigger ()
noOp = T.Trigger with
initialize = pure ()
updateState = \_ -> pure ()
rule = \_ -> do
debug "triggered"
pure ()
registeredTemplates = T.AllInDar
heartbeat = None


In the context of the Getting Started app, if you write the above file, then run daml start and npm start as usual, and then set up the trigger with:

daml trigger --dar .daml/dist/gsg-trigger-0.1.0.dar \
--trigger-name NoOp:noOp \
--ledger-host localhost \
--ledger-port 6865 \
--ledger-user "bob"


and then play with the app as alice and bob just like you did for Your First Feature, you should see the trigger command printing a line for each interaction, containing the message triggered as well as other debug information.

Diversion: Updating Message¶

Before we can make our Trigger more useful, we need to think a bit more about what it is supposed to do. For example, we don’t want to respond to bob’s own messages. We also do not want to send messages when we have not received any.

In order to start with something reasonably simple, we’re going to set the rule as

if the last message we can see was not sent by bob, then we’ll send "Please, tell me more about that." to whoever sent the last message we can see.

This raises the question of how we can determine which message is the last one, given the current structure of a message. In order to solve that, we need to add a Time field to Message, which can be done by editing the Message template in daml/User.daml to look like:

template Message with
sender: Party
content: Text
where


This should result in Daml Studio reporting an error in the SendMessage choice, as it now needs to set the receivedAt field. Here is the updated code for SendMessage:

    -- New definition for SendMessage
nonconsuming choice SendMessage: ContractId Message with
sender: Party
content: Text
controller sender
do
assertMsg "Designated user must follow you back to send a message" (elem sender following)
now <- getTime


The getTime action (doc) returns the time at which the command was received by the sandbox. In more sensitive applications, this may not be sufficiently reliable, as transactions may be processed in parallel (so “received at” timestamp order may not match actual transaction order), and in distributed cases dishonest participants may fudge this value. It’s good enough for this example, though.

Now that we have a field to sort on, and thus a way to identify the latest message, we can turn our attention back to our trigger code.

Open up the trigger code again (daml/ChatBot.daml), and change it to:

module ChatBot where

import qualified Daml.Trigger as T
import qualified User
import qualified DA.List.Total as List
import DA.Action (when)
import DA.Optional (whenSome)

{ initialize = pure ()
, updateState = \_ -> pure ()
, rule = \p -> do
message_contracts <- T.query @User.Message
let messages = map snd message_contracts
debug $"Messages so far: " <> show (length messages) let lastMessage = List.maximumOn (.receivedAt) messages debug$ "Last message: " <> show lastMessage
whenSome lastMessage $\m -> when (m.receiver == p)$ do
users <- T.query @User.User
debug users
let isSender = (\user -> user.username == m.sender)
let replyTo = List.head $filter (\(_, user) -> isSender user) users whenSome replyTo$ \(sender, _) ->
, registeredTemplates = T.AllInDar
, heartbeat = None
}


Refresh daml start by pressing r (followed by Enter on Windows) in its terminal, then start the trigger with:

daml trigger --dar .daml/dist/gsg-trigger-0.1.0.dar \
--ledger-host localhost \
--ledger-port 6865 \
--ledger-user "bob"


Play a bit with alice and bob in your browser, to get a feel for how the trigger works. Watch both the messages in-browser and the debug statements printed by the trigger runner.

Let’s walk through the rule code line-by-line:

• We use the query function to get all of the Message templates visible to the current party (p; in our case this will be bob). Per the documentation, this returns a list of tuples (contract id, payload), which we store as message_contracts.
• We then map the snd function on the result to get only the payloads, i.e. the actual data of the messages we can see.
• We print, as a debug message, the number of messages we can see.
• On the next line, get the message with the highest receivedAt field (maximumOn).
• We then print another debug message, this time printing the message our code has identified as “the last message visible to the current party”. If you run this, you’ll see that lastMessage is actually a Optional Message. This is because the maximumOn function will return the element from a list for which the given functions produces the highest value if the list has at least one element, but it needs to still do something sensible if the list is empty; in this case, it would return None.
• When lastMessage is Some m (whenSome), we execute the given function. Otherwise, lastMessage is None and we implicitly do nothing.
• Next, we need to check whether the message has been sent to or by the party running the trigger (with the current Daml model, it has to be one or the other, as messages are only visible to the sender and receiver). when the expression m.receiver == p is True, we then our expectations of the ledger state are wrong and we need to correct it. Otherwise, the state matches our rule and we don’t need to do anything.
• At this point we know the state is “wrong”, per our expectations, and start engaging in correcting actions. For this trigger, this means sendinga message to the sender of the last message. In order to do that, we need to find the User contract for the sender. We start by getting the list of all User contracts we know about, which will be all users who follow the party running the trigger (and that party’s own User contract). As for Message contracts earlier, the result of query @User is going to be a list of tuples with (contract id, payload). The big difference is that this time we actually want to keep the contract ids, as that is what we’ll use to send a message back.
• We print the list of users we just fetched, as a debug message.
• We create a function to identify the user we are looking for.
• We get the user contract by applying our isSender function as a filter on the list of users, and then taking the head of that list, i.e. its first element.
• Just like maximumOn, head will return an Optional a, so the next step is to check whether we have actually found the relevant User contract. In most cases we should find it, but remember that users can send us a message if we follow them, whereas we can only answer if they follow us.
• If we did find some User contract to reply to, we extract the corresponding contract id (first element of the tuple, sender) and discard the payload (second element, _), and we exercise the SendMessage choice, passing in the current party p as the sender. See below for additional information on what that dedup in the name of the command means.

Command Deduplication¶

Daml Triggers react to many things, and it’s usually important to make sure that the same command is not sent mutiple times.

For example, in our autoReply chatbot above, the rule will be triggered not only when we receive a message, but also when we send one, as well as when we follow a user or get followed by a user, and when we stop following a user or a user stops following us.

It’s easy to imagine a sequence of events that would make a naive trigger implementation send too many messages. For example:

• alice sends "hi", so the trigger runs and sends an exercise command.
• _Before_ the exercise command is fully processed, carol follows bob, which triggers the rule again. The state of all the Message contracts bob can see has not changed, so the rule might send the response to alice again.

We obviously don’t want that to happen, as it would likely prevent us from passing that Turing test we were after.

Triggers offer a few features to help users manage that. Possibly the simplest one is the dedup* family of ledger operations. When using those, the trigger runner will keep track of the commands currently sent and prevent sending the exact same command again. In the above example, the trigger would see that, when carol follows bob and the rule runs dedupExercise, there is already an Exercise command in flight with the exact same value, in this case same message, same sender and same receiver.

Note that, if instead the in-between event is alice following carol, this simple deduplication mechanism might not work as expected: because the User contract ID for alice would have changed, the new command is not the same as the in-flight one and thus a second SendMessage exercise would be sent to the ledger.

Similarly, if alice sends a second message quickly after the first one, this deduplication would prevent it, because the “response” does not have any reference to which message it’s responding to. This may or may not be what we want.

If this simple deduplication is not suited to your use-case, you have two other tools at your disposal. The first one is the second argument to the emitCommands action (doc), which is a list of contract IDs. These IDs will be filtered out of any ACS query made by this trigger until the commands submitted as part of the same emitCommands call have completed. If your trigger is based on seeing certain contracts, this can be a simple, effective way to prevent triggering it multiple times.

The last tool you have at your disposal is the getCommandsInflight action (doc), which returns all of the commands this instance of the trigger runner has sent and that have not yet been resolved (i.e. either committed or failed). You can then build your own logic based on this list, the ACS, and possibly your own trigger state.

Finally, do keep in mind that all of these mechanisms rely on internal state from the trigger runner, which keeps track of which commands it has sent and for which it’s not seen a completion. They will all fail to deduplicate if that internal state is lost, e.g. if the trigger runner is shut down and a new one is started. As such, these deduplication mechanisms should be seen as an optimization rather than a requirement for correctness. The Daml model should be designed such that duplicated commands are either rejected (e.g. using keys or relying on changing contract IDs) or benign.

Authorization¶

When using Daml triggers against a Ledger with request authorization, you can pass --access-token-file token.jwt to daml trigger which will read the token from the file token.jwt.

If you plan to run more than one trigger at a time, or triggers for more than one party at a time, you may be interested in the Trigger Service.

When not to use Daml triggers¶

Daml triggers deliberately only allow you to express automation that listens for ledger events and reacts to them by sending commands to the ledger.

Daml Triggers are not suited for automation that needs to interact with services or data outside of the ledger. For those cases, you can write a ledger client using the JavaScript bindings running against the HTTP JSON API or the Java bindings running against the gRPC Ledger API.