Closed artemii235 closed 2 years ago
RPC calls integration process
The list of RPC calls that are not planned to be integrated shortly:
@tonymorony I've recently merged the huge WASM integration PR to the dev branch. Could you please arrange testing according to this list https://github.com/KomodoPlatform/atomicDEX-API/pull/1007#issuecomment-908784815?
taker_swap:277] WARN Swap 527e162c-a011-4865-aad5-42068a9d2f78 file lock is acquired by another process/thread, aborting
exception: [json.exception.type_error.302] type must be string, but is null
. Imported swap responded as expected when queried with swap_status. App history redraw fixed once .json file deleted.myorders
. Both are saved as json in DB/<ID>/ORDERS/MY/MAKER
. Orders created in app do not show up in myorders
. Orders created in CLI do not show up in GUI orders list, but do show up in orderbook tagged as mine.
After restarting mm2 in CLI, all orders are returned from myorders
After restarting app, all orders are listed in GUI.myorders
returning maker and taker orders (except taker orders that have initiated a swap)Still a few tests do run, will report once complete this evening
Orders testing in CLI completed without problem
update_maker_order RPC call works correctly;
my_orders RPC call work correctly for Maker and Taker orders;
orders_history_by_filter RPC call work correctly with many different parameter combinations. Especially for Maker and Taker orders;
order_status returns correct info of already matched/canceled Maker and Taker orders.
@smk762 thanks for the testing! I have one question regarding
Maker orders created on app show up in orders list. Orders created in CLI are returned with myorders. Both are saved as json in DB/
/ORDERS/MY/MAKER. Orders created in app do not show up in myorders. Orders created in CLI do not show up in GUI orders list, but do show up in orderbook tagged as mine.
Is it expected behavior? I didn't quite understand what this test was :sweat_smile:
Just a comment, seen while testing. I think it is just GUI processing differently, so no problem.
Just an idea for the future: implement a "WalletConnect" like protocol to connect the web instances running without hardware wallets and/or extension support to instances that have such support.
@sergeyboyko0791 Can we close this one? :slightly_smiling_face:
I hope we can!