Patch app side balance checking for publishing/claiming channel #1007

New issue

Closed

opened 2018-02-09 01:33:36 +01:00 by tzarebczan · 2 comments

tzarebczan commented

2018-02-09 01:33:36 +01:00

(Migrated from github.com)

The Issue

In https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/pull/794, we did some patching on the app side to account for a hold-up on a daemon issue(https://github.com/lbryio/lbry/issues/855), but there are a few scenarios that weren't taken into account. Two are logged here on the daemon side: https://github.com/lbryio/lbry/issues/1107 because the result is confusing. This also expands upon https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/issues/874

These are the three scenarios

Creating a channel with a bid amount that's exactly equal to your wallet balance > channel is created even though the bid fails (https://github.com/lbryio/lbry/issues/1107). Subsequent publish fails with https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/issues/874
Publishing with a bid amount that's exactly equal to your wallet balance > object error in https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/issues/874
Creating a channel/publish for a tiny amount (0.000000001 is what some user tried and I confirmed it breaks too). Subsequent publish fails with https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/issues/874
Publishing with a 0 LBC bid > object error in https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/issues/874

In the first and 2nd scenarios, the app allows the channel to be selected even though it's not created successfully according to the daemon. This causes additional confusion because you run into https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/issues/874 when trying to publish with the channel.

For the scenario where wallet balance = claim amount, we should warn that they cannot use their entire balance and ask them to try a smaller amount. Not sure how to handle this better before https://github.com/lbryio/lbry/issues/1045 is implemented.

System Configuration

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

Anything Else

Screenshots

## The Issue In https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/pull/794, we did some patching on the app side to account for a hold-up on a daemon issue(https://github.com/lbryio/lbry/issues/855), but there are a few scenarios that weren't taken into account. Two are logged here on the daemon side: https://github.com/lbryio/lbry/issues/1107 because the result is confusing. This also expands upon https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/issues/874 These are the three scenarios 1) Creating a channel with a bid amount that's exactly equal to your wallet balance > channel is created even though the bid fails (https://github.com/lbryio/lbry/issues/1107). Subsequent publish fails with https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/issues/874 2) Publishing with a bid amount that's exactly equal to your wallet balance > object error in https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/issues/874 2) Creating a channel/publish for a tiny amount (0.000000001 is what some user tried and I confirmed it breaks too). Subsequent publish fails with https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/issues/874 3) Publishing with a 0 LBC bid > object error in https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/issues/874 In the first and 2nd scenarios, the app allows the channel to be selected even though it's not created successfully according to the daemon. This causes additional confusion because you run into https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/issues/874 when trying to publish with the channel. For the scenario where wallet balance = claim amount, we should warn that they cannot use their entire balance and ask them to try a smaller amount. Not sure how to handle this better before https://github.com/lbryio/lbry/issues/1045 is implemented. ## System Configuration   - LBRY Daemon version: - LBRY App version: - LBRY Installation ID: - Operating system: ## Anything Else  ## Screenshots

tzarebczan commented

2018-02-12 21:00:15 +01:00

(Migrated from github.com)

@kauffj / @liam do we want to prioritize additional app side patching while the protocol's shortcomings are worked through? This is the main cause of that [object object] message which surfaces in the scenarios described above which we have seen quite often.

tzarebczan commented

2018-06-21 07:46:30 +02:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Closing this, the UX has improved but final enhancements will be added when the daemon can provide fee estimates.