You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As of now, to avoid larger loss to the user, it is enforced that both in active and pending_inactive pools, a user has at least MIN_COINS_ON_SHARES_POOL.
Therefore, if an unlock from a user is for an amount less than MIN_COINS_ON_SHARES_POOL, a larger amount is unlocked to ensure the above invariant. This, however, results in a surprise for the user.
Also see if same restriction need to be applied to add_stake, and whether this can cause any restriction on reward distribution/ restaking and any other flows except the ones triggered by the user.
We should add an assert that checks that unlock requested is always above MIN_COINS_ON_SHARES_POOL. This would always result in the amount being unlocked either exactly same as the amount requested or lesser by 1 quant (due to conversion from amount to shares and then back to amount).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
As of now, to avoid larger loss to the user, it is enforced that both in
active
andpending_inactive
pools, a user has at leastMIN_COINS_ON_SHARES_POOL
.Therefore, if an
unlock
from a user is for an amount less thanMIN_COINS_ON_SHARES_POOL
, a larger amount is unlocked to ensure the above invariant. This, however, results in a surprise for the user.Also see if same restriction need to be applied to
add_stake
, and whether this can cause any restriction on reward distribution/ restaking and any other flows except the ones triggered by the user.We should add an
assert
that checks thatunlock
requested is always aboveMIN_COINS_ON_SHARES_POOL
. This would always result in the amount being unlocked either exactly same as the amount requested or lesser by1
quant (due to conversion from amount to shares and then back to amount).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: