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

bug(CL): write tick to state during swaps #3890

Closed
Tracked by #3074
p0mvn opened this issue Dec 30, 2022 · 3 comments
Closed
Tracked by #3074

bug(CL): write tick to state during swaps #3890

p0mvn opened this issue Dec 30, 2022 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
F: concentrated-liquidity Tracking the development of concentrated liquidity feature to improve filtering on the project board

Comments

@p0mvn
Copy link
Member

p0mvn commented Dec 30, 2022

Background

Currently, the ticks are not written back to state when they are updated during swaps.

Suggested Design

We need to make sure that ticks are updated.

Acceptance Criteria

  • add tests upon fixing the problem. For example, you cannot drain the same liquidity multiple times
@p0mvn p0mvn added the F: concentrated-liquidity Tracking the development of concentrated liquidity feature to improve filtering on the project board label Dec 30, 2022
@mattverse
Copy link
Member

@p0mvn
Copy link
Member Author

p0mvn commented Jan 3, 2023

I don't think so. Ticks would have to be updates as we cross them since they have liquidity drained.

This would have to happen at a much lower level of abstraction:

@mattverse
Copy link
Member

Closing this issue as an outcome from investigation that the tick state does not need to get updated during swaps, instead the fee accumulators need to be updated, will post a separate issue / PR for this task

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
F: concentrated-liquidity Tracking the development of concentrated liquidity feature to improve filtering on the project board
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants