-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 61
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
bugfix: handle new rate-limits for querying pools #433
bugfix: handle new rate-limits for querying pools #433
Conversation
@akorchyn Thank you for your contribution! Your pull request is now a part of the Race of Sloths! Current status: executed
Your contribution is much appreciated with a final score of 8! @frolvanya received 25 Sloth Points for reviewing and scoring this pull request. Another weekly streak completed, well done @akorchyn! To keep your weekly streak and get another bonus make pull request next week! Looking forward to see you in race-of-sloths What is the Race of SlothsRace of Sloths is a friendly competition where you can participate in challenges and compete with other open-source contributors within your normal workflow For contributors:
For maintainers:
Feel free to check our website for additional details! Bot commands
|
@race-of-sloths score 3 |
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.
LGTM
@race-of-sloths score 13 |
LGTM. I don't think there should be a separate ConfigV3 struct as it is the same as V2. Though it's ok |
Closes: #431
Ideally, if Fastnear is stable enough, the user shouldn't be able to hit this limit as we will query information within the pools the user has staked before.
But in case the fastener fails, we would need to query all active pools, which number more than 150.
@race-of-sloths