Release client v0.10.36, Centrifuge 1025 & Altair 1034 #1749
Conversation
| /// The current storage version. | ||
| const STORAGE_VERSION: StorageVersion = StorageVersion::new(1); | ||
|
|
||
| #[pallet::pallet] | ||
| #[pallet::storage_version(STORAGE_VERSION)] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This slipped under our radar. Note to ourselves to not forget storage versions of pallets in the future.
| @@ -23,8 +23,8 @@ use sp_runtime::{traits::checked_pow, FixedPointNumber}; | |||
|
|
|||
| use super::*; | |||
|
|
|||
| const CURRENCY_IN: u32 = 1; | |||
| const CURRENCY_OUT: u32 = 2; | |||
| const CURRENCY_IN: u32 = 1000; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Out of curiosity, what was the issue here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Benchmarks failed because at least CURRENCY_IN existed in storage already.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Mmm... but who was registering that CURRENCY_IN before? 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Couldn't find a quick answer and didn't wanna spend more time debugging this because debugging runtime benchmarks is really annoying.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No problem! Just curious in case you knew it
| @@ -334,7 +334,7 @@ pub mod pallet { | |||
| impl<T: Config> Pallet<T> { | |||
| /// Create an order with the default min fulfillment amount. | |||
| #[pallet::call_index(0)] | |||
| #[pallet::weight(T::Weights::create_order())] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for clean up my dirty!
| Self::update_portfolio_valuation_for_pool(pool_id, &mut T::Balance::zero())?; | ||
|
|
||
| // Ok(Some(T::WeightInfo::update_portfolio_valuation(count)).into()) | ||
| Ok(Some(T::DbWeight::get().reads(1)).into()) | ||
| Ok(Some(T::WeightInfo::update_portfolio_valuation(count)).into()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The above weights attached to this extrinsic is
#[pallet::weight(Weight::from_parts(10_000, 0))]Should we change it to:
#[pallet::weight(Weight::update_porfolio_valuation(T::MaxFeesPeerPool::get()))]to get a real maximum suggestion of the expected fees for this extrinsic?
|
Because this is critical, I would like to have another couple of eyes here to ensure all version numbers are correctly set and other such things. But LGTM! |
Description
Changes
PoolFeestrait intoPoolFeesMutateandPoolFeesInspectwhereas the latter is only needed for weightsTODO
Checklist: