-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 992
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
Fixfees #3481
Fixfees #3481
Conversation
…-{server,wallet}.toml
…accept_fee_base instead
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👍 Looks good to me.
Couple of really minor formatting comments.
One question about our bucketing/aggregation logic and how fee_shift
and fee_rate
interacts with this. I'm not clear how this should work when bucketing dependent transactions together.
Do we need to handle |
Yes, FeeFields::fee() should be version dependent. I need to ponder how best to provide it with the header version. |
I'm thinking about this as well. Edit: If we make |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm 👍.
I'd like another pair of eyes on this before we merge though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Passing height
into accept_fee()
looks 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good overall but wasn't able to spend too much time thinking through further possible corner cases and did not get a chance to manually test. Will be good to test this change extensively with the beta release. 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good, I just have one question.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👍 to merge assuming CI completes succesfully.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Error mixed up with grin-wallet repo please ignore.
See explanation: https://github.com/mimblewimble/grin-rfcs/blob/master/text/0017-fix-fees.md * add FeeFields type * use FeeFields with ::zero and try_into().unwrap() * fixed tests * avoid 0 accept_base_fee * add aggregate_fee_fields method for transaction * implement std::fmt::Display trait for FeeFields * make base_fee argument non-optional in libtx::mod::tx_fee * add global and thread local accept_fee_base; use to simplify tests * set unusually high fee base for a change * revert to optional base fee argument; default coming from either grin-{server,wallet}.toml * remove optional base fee argument; can be set with global::set_local_accept_fee_base instead * define constant global::DEFAULT_ACCEPT_FEE_BASE and set global value * add Transaction::accept_fee() method and use * Manual (de)ser impl on FeeFields * fix comment bug * Serialize FeeFields as int in tx * allow feefields: u32:into() for tests * try adding height args everywhere * make FeeFields shift/fee methods height dependent * prior to hf4 feefield testing * rename selected fee_fields back to fee for serialization compatibility * fix test_fee_fields test, merge conflict, and doctest use of obsolete fee_fields * make accept_fee height dependent * Accept any u64 in FeeFields deser
name: fixfees
about: implement fixfees RFC
title: Fix Fees
labels: consensus-breaking, must-have
assignees: @antiochp @yeastplume @quentinlesceller