[MEX-663] Fix tokens liquidity #1549
Conversation
- return min(first_token_locked_value, second_token_locked_value) if difference between them is larger than 1mil
| break; | ||
|
|
||
| const relevantPairs = pairs.filter((pair) => | ||
| [pair.firstTokenID, pair.secondTokenID].includes(tokenID), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nitpicking, but a new array will be allocated at each iteration. either extract the array outside of the filter or refactor like:
tokenID === pair.firstTokenID || tokenID === pair.secondTokenID
| new BigNumber(firstTokenLockedValueUSD) | ||
| .minus(secondTokenLockedValueUSD) | ||
| .abs() | ||
| .gt(1000000) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should we extract this in config, or at least a constant?
| .abs() | ||
| .gt(1000000) | ||
| ) { | ||
| return BigNumber.min( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not accurate because it is missing the second half of the liquidity. We should use the common token from the pair to compute the total value locked for a pair in this scenario. In addition, we should consider the double of the common token as the whole liquidity locked in a pool
| const secondTokenLockedValueUSD = | ||
| allSecondTokensLockedValueUSD[index]; | ||
|
|
||
| if ( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we should reconsider this check as it isn't accurate.
Reasoning
startandenddates used in the queries will differ at the benning of an hourProposed Changes
1000000only use the smallest valueupdateHistoricPairsDataand decrease query cache warmer delay valueHow to test