-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 302
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
Implement value circuit breaker #3690
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
erwanor
reviewed
Jan 29, 2024
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 have done a preliminary pass, but it will be easier for me to dig in when we resolve the serialization shenanigans. It's late but something seems off about the resolution of the balance check; will do a second pass tomorrow am.
…eaker to nonconsensus
hdevalence
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 6, 2024
Closes #3690 This renames the previous `check_stateful` method to `check_historical`, renames `execute` to `check_and_execute`, and by default moves all of the content of `check_stateful` into `check_and_execute`, unless there's an obvious and LOCAL reason why it's safe to do so that can be written into the body of the method. IMO it's still worth it to have the method in the trait. We may wish to take advantage of it later, when we can spend more time carefully reasoning about performance. Note: we've left behind two versions of the trait, which will be reconciled in a later commit.
hdevalence
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 7, 2024
Closes #3690 This renames the previous `check_stateful` method to `check_historical`, renames `execute` to `check_and_execute`, and by default moves all of the content of `check_stateful` into `check_and_execute`, unless there's an obvious and LOCAL reason why it's safe to do so that can be written into the body of the method. IMO it's still worth it to have the method in the trait. We may wish to take advantage of it later, when we can spend more time carefully reasoning about performance. Note: we've left behind two versions of the trait, which will be reconciled in a later commit.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This adds a value circuit breaker to the
PositionManager
logic.Whenever a position is stored, the total reserve amounts (across all positions) are tracked by the
ValueCircuitBreaker
. If after storing a position the reserve balance ever becomes negative ("required"), this implies that more value was taken out of positions than was stored in them, and an error is bubbled up.Closes #2986