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

chore: Drop solver_fee column from order_execution table #2100

Closed
sunce86 opened this issue Nov 30, 2023 · 1 comment
Closed

chore: Drop solver_fee column from order_execution table #2100

sunce86 opened this issue Nov 30, 2023 · 1 comment

Comments

@sunce86
Copy link
Contributor

sunce86 commented Nov 30, 2023

Background

This field was added when surplus_fee for limit orders was calculated before order execution (and even was periodically recalculated before, during and after the limit order was executed). The field was added to capture the value at execution time.

Since this functionality is dropped and limit orders now get the fee from solvers, we can also drop this column, since for limit orders is zero, while for market orders is equal to solvers_fee from the order struct which is constant over time, so it's basically a duplicated data.

@sunce86 sunce86 changed the title chore: Drop solver_fee column from order_executions table chore: Drop solver_fee column from order_execution table Nov 30, 2023
@fleupold fleupold mentioned this issue Feb 5, 2024
2 tasks
fleupold added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 6, 2024
# Description
See related issues for context

# Changes

- [x] Drop `auction_transactions` table
- [x] Drop `solver_fee` column (always null now)

## How to test
Run migration locally

## Related Issues

Fixes #2350 & #2100
@sunce86
Copy link
Contributor Author

sunce86 commented Feb 6, 2024

Closed with #2359

@sunce86 sunce86 closed this as completed Feb 6, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants