LQT: Indexing V2 #5113
Open
LQT: Indexing V2 #5113
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This also does a bit of refactoring to avoid repeated logic w.r.t. calculating position metrics. This extends to the actual volume tracking itself, but there should be no functional changes anywhere because of this.
This will match what the UI will actually be.
2 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Describe your changes
This updates the lqt indexing to provide what should be more or less a backing of the UI we want to end up with.
Compared to other indexers, this innovates by:
I've found the latter to be quite beneficial compared to the dex work. It does require some more prowess in SQL, but it is at least 50% less tedious to update a view than it is to update the Rust code. One big advantage is that you don't have to write out all the boilerplate needed to read the backing tables into Rust, which saves a lot of code.
Testing
Unfortunately, this won't work well on the testnet, because we don't have genesis params for the LQT.
On a devnet I ran this with a few interactions, getting the following results:
These all seem coherent at a basic level to me.
Checklist before requesting a review
I have added guiding text to explain how a reviewer should test these changes.
If this code contains consensus-breaking changes, I have added the "consensus-breaking" label. Otherwise, I declare my belief that there are not consensus-breaking changes, for the following reason: