Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Consider module max withdraw in max_withdraw query #2462

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 18, 2024

Conversation

deficruncher
Copy link
Contributor

@deficruncher deficruncher commented Mar 17, 2024

Fix max_withdraw function so it considers MaxModuleWithdraw.

There are cases in which MaxModuleWithdraw is smaller than user MaxWithdraw. When it happens umee allows user to select invalid withdraw amount that will result in error when broadcasting transaction

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Refactor
    • Improved the calculation for maximum withdrawal amount for users, ensuring more accurate transaction limits.
    • Updated the userMaxWithdraw method call to use q.Keeper.userMaxWithdraw for better functionality.
    • Added logic to calculate the minimum value between uToken.Amount and moduleMaxWithdraw for enhanced processing.

@deficruncher deficruncher requested a review from a team as a code owner March 17, 2024 11:11
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 17, 2024

Walkthrough

The update involves refining the logic for calculating a user's maximum withdrawal amount in the grpc_query.go file. Specifically, it enhances the method call to access userMaxWithdraw directly via the Keeper and introduces a new step to determine the lesser of two values, uToken.Amount and moduleMaxWithdraw, as a preliminary action before moving forward with additional computations.

Changes

File Summary
.../grpc_query.go Updated userMaxWithdraw to q.Keeper.userMaxWithdraw and added logic for minimum value calculation.

🐰✨
To the code we hop and bound,
A tiny tweak, improvements found.
In the realm of withdraw and save,
We fine-tune the flow, the path we pave.
🌟 Between two sums, we pick the least,
Ensuring the code's beauty, not the beast.
Cheers to changes, small yet bright,
In the coder's world, they bring light. 🌈
🐰💻

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit-tests for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit tests for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit tests.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • The JSON schema for the configuration file is available here.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/coderabbit-overrides.v2.json

CodeRabbit Discord Community

Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 1

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0aeea63 and 52dfa1e.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • x/leverage/keeper/grpc_query.go (1 hunks)

x/leverage/keeper/grpc_query.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 0

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 52dfa1e and 8ec9cd3.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • x/leverage/keeper/grpc_query.go (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • x/leverage/keeper/grpc_query.go

Copy link
Member

@robert-zaremba robert-zaremba left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. @toteki please check as well, this is related to the recent update you were doing as well.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 18, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 33.33333% with 8 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 68.91%. Comparing base (7f05ad4) to head (387b5f4).
Report is 408 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2462      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   75.38%   68.91%   -6.48%     
==========================================
  Files         100      184      +84     
  Lines        8025    10866    +2841     
==========================================
+ Hits         6050     7488    +1438     
- Misses       1589     2766    +1177     
- Partials      386      612     +226     
Files Coverage Δ
x/leverage/keeper/grpc_query.go 64.33% <33.33%> (-2.88%) ⬇️

... and 174 files with indirect coverage changes

@robert-zaremba
Copy link
Member

there was a linter issue, I fixed it.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 1

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 8ec9cd3 and 387b5f4.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • x/leverage/keeper/grpc_query.go (1 hunks)

x/leverage/keeper/grpc_query.go Show resolved Hide resolved
@robert-zaremba robert-zaremba disabled auto-merge March 18, 2024 21:01
@robert-zaremba robert-zaremba merged commit 32e7c21 into umee-network:main Mar 18, 2024
24 of 26 checks passed
@deficruncher
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thx!

Additionally we might do the analogical change to MaxWithdraw message. I decided to only touch the query though, because its not consensus affecting.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants