optimism: uniswap pools dex balances

[Jason4276]

Thank you for contributing to Spellbook 🪄

Please open the PR in draft and mark as ready when you want to request a review.

Description:

[...]

---

quick links for more information:

• README.md
• spellbook docs
• CONTRIBUTING.md

[0xRobin]

please merge in main to resolve the compile issue.

[jeff-dude]

Suggested change

	FROM
	op_pools p
	LEFT JOIN
	filtered_balances b ON p.pool_address = b.pool_address
	FROM
	filtered_balances b
	RIGHT JOIN
	op_pools p ON p.pool_address = b.pool_address

[jeff-dude]

thank you for the patience and iterating on changes to improve the spell. one last request, can we try flipping the read table and right join pools, since balances is larger table? just curious to see impact on run time.

[Jason4276]

Thanks for the suggestion! I've updated the query to use a RIGHT JOIN with filtered_balances as the read table and op_pools on the right. I'll test the runtime and see if it improves performance.

[jeff-dude]

coming back with another suggestion. you can try in a fresh PR, if you'd like, to keep things clean. i notice you're building out various DEXs to fit this similar design pattern. can we try an approach to read from dex.trades with some filters:

• chains interested in
• where pool contains OP token
• ...whatever else you can think to filter

then pass that output into our generic balances macro, like this PR?
https://github.com/duneanalytics/spellbook/pull/7411/files#diff-9c62c63ab7a828b94dff4bb17dfb6aa19381f6dfcd838aa47397886ede38e1eb

i think in the long run, this could save you time across various DEXs. the question will be how that performs, as you could be pulling many more pools than you do here.

[jeff-dude]

closing in favor of new PR