DistributedCollective
Feat/2753800110 reward endpoint
Deploy Preview for legacy-dapp ready!
| Name | Link |
|---|---|
| Latest commit | 7d33e4b9a19f41ec772688fb3464c25c7b9c84e5 |
| Latest deploy log | https://app.netlify.com/sites/legacy-dapp/deploys/62eaa4a00838d600094a98ab |
| Deploy Preview | https://deploy-preview-2316--legacy-dapp.netlify.app/ |
| Preview on mobile | Toggle QR Code...Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link. |
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings.
![netlify[bot] avatar](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/13473?v=4 "Published by a pub.dev verified publisher"){kind=small}
During my testing on testnet, I noticed that the history table contains the same items with every tab but I think I should see different events in different tabs. Also, with the new implementation we have 10 pages in the history table but only 5 in the existing implementation for the first tab, that's why I think all of the history tables are now combined.
Amounts to claim are identical so that should be ok.
Can you take a look into the history tables issue @pietro-maximoff and consult it with @BetsyBraddock ?
New implementation:
Existing implementation:
During my testing on testnet, I noticed that the history table contains the same items with every tab but I think I should see different events in different tabs. Also, with the new implementation we have 10 pages in the history table but only 5 in the existing implementation for the first tab, that's why I think all of the history tables are now combined.
Amounts to claim are identical so that should be ok.
Can you take a look into the history tables issue @pietro-maximoff and consult it with @BetsyBraddock ?
New implementation:
Existing implementation:
Thanks tiltom. I think I have an answer for you, but I'm not completely sure. I think the issue is the legacy backend, especially on testnet but on mainnet also, was not capturing every single event.
For example, take this transaction: 0x9e85858a2cb04377399ae00455b2e7a2e0329e546dc161d77a617cd3356324a3
https://explorer.testnet.rsk.co/tx/0x9e85858a2cb04377399ae00455b2e7a2e0329e546dc161d77a617cd3356324a3?__ctab=Transaction
It emits 2 EarnReward events (log 20 and log 8), but the legacy backend only picks up one.
The strange thing is, I can't find the Trade event that goes with it.
If this is the case (that the legacy backend just missed a lot of events), then I think it's ok as this version would be more accurate - what do you think?
During my testing on testnet, I noticed that the history table contains the same items with every tab but I think I should see different events in different tabs. Also, with the new implementation we have 10 pages in the history table but only 5 in the existing implementation for the first tab, that's why I think all of the history tables are now combined. Amounts to claim are identical so that should be ok. Can you take a look into the history tables issue @pietro-maximoff and consult it with @BetsyBraddock ? New implementation:
Thanks tiltom. I think I have an answer for you, but I'm not completely sure. I think the issue is the legacy backend, especially on testnet but on mainnet also, was not capturing every single event.
For example, take this transaction: 0x9e85858a2cb04377399ae00455b2e7a2e0329e546dc161d77a617cd3356324a3
https://explorer.testnet.rsk.co/tx/0x9e85858a2cb04377399ae00455b2e7a2e0329e546dc161d77a617cd3356324a3?__ctab=Transaction
It emits 2 EarnReward events (log 20 and log 8), but the legacy backend only picks up one.
The strange thing is, I can't find the Trade event that goes with it.
If this is the case (that the legacy backend just missed a lot of events), then I think it's ok as this version would be more accurate - what do you think?
Hey Betsy, thanks for the reply. If it's as you said and the subgraph is just more accurate, I am completely ok with that.
But I am still not sure if we want to have the same history table for every tab or if we should show only the respective events. I think it's the latter but that's something that probably @pietro-maximoff can answer.
During my testing on testnet, I noticed that the history table contains the same items with every tab but I think I should see different events in different tabs. Also, with the new implementation we have 10 pages in the history table but only 5 in the existing implementation for the first tab, that's why I think all of the history tables are now combined. Amounts to claim are identical so that should be ok. Can you take a look into the history tables issue @pietro-maximoff and consult it with @BetsyBraddock ? New implementation:
Thanks tiltom. I think I have an answer for you, but I'm not completely sure. I think the issue is the legacy backend, especially on testnet but on mainnet also, was not capturing every single event. For example, take this transaction: 0x9e85858a2cb04377399ae00455b2e7a2e0329e546dc161d77a617cd3356324a3 https://explorer.testnet.rsk.co/tx/0x9e85858a2cb04377399ae00455b2e7a2e0329e546dc161d77a617cd3356324a3?__ctab=Transaction It emits 2 EarnReward events (log 20 and log 8), but the legacy backend only picks up one. The strange thing is, I can't find the Trade event that goes with it. If this is the case (that the legacy backend just missed a lot of events), then I think it's ok as this version would be more accurate - what do you think?
Hey Betsy, thanks for the reply. If it's as you said and the subgraph is just more accurate, I am completely ok with that.
But I am still not sure if we want to have the same history table for every tab or if we should show only the respective events. I think it's the latter but that's something that probably @pietro-maximoff can answer.
Yes I think you're right about not having the same history for each tab. @pietro-maximoff
During my testing on testnet, I noticed that the history table contains the same items with every tab but I think I should see different events in different tabs. Also, with the new implementation we have 10 pages in the history table but only 5 in the existing implementation for the first tab, that's why I think all of the history tables are now combined. Amounts to claim are identical so that should be ok. Can you take a look into the history tables issue @pietro-maximoff and consult it with @BetsyBraddock ? New implementation:
Thanks tiltom. I think I have an answer for you, but I'm not completely sure. I think the issue is the legacy backend, especially on testnet but on mainnet also, was not capturing every single event. For example, take this transaction: 0x9e85858a2cb04377399ae00455b2e7a2e0329e546dc161d77a617cd3356324a3 https://explorer.testnet.rsk.co/tx/0x9e85858a2cb04377399ae00455b2e7a2e0329e546dc161d77a617cd3356324a3?__ctab=Transaction It emits 2 EarnReward events (log 20 and log 8), but the legacy backend only picks up one. The strange thing is, I can't find the Trade event that goes with it. If this is the case (that the legacy backend just missed a lot of events), then I think it's ok as this version would be more accurate - what do you think?
Hey Betsy, thanks for the reply. If it's as you said and the subgraph is just more accurate, I am completely ok with that.
But I am still not sure if we want to have the same history table for every tab or if we should show only the respective events. I think it's the latter but that's something that probably @pietro-maximoff can answer.
Do you mean that you think Trading Rewards, Liquidity Rewards and Staking Rewards etc etc should be split into separate tabs? I think that would be better as I think the fact that there are loads of tiny Trading rewards looks a bit strange.
Maybe we should discuss with product?