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

Transaction List - Claim update amounts incorrect #611

Closed
tzarebczan opened this Issue Sep 24, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@tzarebczan
Copy link
Member

tzarebczan commented Sep 24, 2017

The Issue

Currently, an update claim transaction shows the bid amount as the amount of the transaction. Since an update tx takes the previous bid input, funds are moved from the previous claim to the new one, so they aren't really spent during a transaction where the bid is not changed. In this case, it would show 0 and only a fee.

There are also 2 other scenarios to take into account and calculate the transaction amount based on the original bid - a lower bid and higher bid. For a lower bid, you'd have a net positive amount on the update. For a higher bid, you would have a net negative amount.

Expected behaviour

Update tx amount should show net positive or negative bid amount

Actual behaviour

Update tx amount shows the bid amount

System Configuration

  • LBRY Daemon version:
  • LBRY App version:
  • LBRY Installation ID:
  • Operating system:

Anything Else

Screenshots

@kauffj kauffj added this to the October 2 milestone Sep 26, 2017

@tzarebczan tzarebczan changed the title Transaction List - Claim updates amounts incorrect Transaction List - Claim update amounts incorrect Sep 27, 2017

@lyoshenka lyoshenka modified the milestones: October 2, October 16 Oct 3, 2017

@tzarebczan

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

tzarebczan commented Oct 11, 2017

Issue moved to lbryio/lbry #947 via ZenHub

@tzarebczan

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

tzarebczan commented Nov 7, 2017

@hackrush01, reopening this one app side for you based on the daemon implementation.

@tzarebczan tzarebczan reopened this Nov 7, 2017

@hackrush01

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

hackrush01 commented Nov 23, 2017

Fixed in #731.

@hackrush01 hackrush01 closed this Nov 23, 2017

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.