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

feat: pricer v2.0 #444

Closed
wants to merge 8 commits into from
Closed

feat: pricer v2.0 #444

wants to merge 8 commits into from

Conversation

haythemsellami
Copy link
Member

Task: pricer v2.0

High Level Description

Specific Changes
Function x was added ...

Code

  • Unit test 100% coverage
  • Does your code follow the naming and code documentation guidelines?

Documentation

  • Is your code up to date with the spec?
  • Have you added your tests to the testing doc?

@haythemsellami haythemsellami self-assigned this Nov 16, 2021
@haythemsellami haythemsellami changed the title [WIP] feat: pricer v2.0 feat: pricer v2.0 Nov 18, 2021
@antoncoding
Copy link
Contributor

What's the benefit of updating the oracle right now?

functionally, isn't it the same cuz we are already able to dispute an old price? why do we need this oracle update right now with the new pricer updates.

I don't think we have time to run oracle migration right now, so not sure why we're updating the Oracle contract

@antoncoding
Copy link
Contributor

antoncoding commented Nov 18, 2021

Can we just implement a function that allow us to set price from the pricer? (literally the exact old function)

Just so we can limit the scope to the pricer, avoid the migration. (a full migration will require us to redeploy all the pricers, and corresponding infra) I really think just adding a public function solve 95% of the problem while maintaining the same level of centralization power.

@@ -100,6 +92,7 @@ contract('ChainlinkPricer', ([owner, bot, random]) => {
before('setup history in aggregator', async () => {
// set t0, t1, t2, expiry, t3, t4
t0 = (await time.latest()).toNumber()
console.log('t0', t0)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

remove

@haythemsellami
Copy link
Member Author

Can we just implement a function that allow us to set price from the pricer? (literally the exact old function)

Just so we can limit the scope to the pricer, avoid the migration. (a full migration will require us to redeploy all the pricers, and corresponding infra) I really think just adding a public function solve 95% of the problem while maintaining the same level of centralization power.

Yes I agree, but don't you think it is not the perfect design and way of doing things ?! just adding duplicate functions ?

@antoncoding
Copy link
Contributor

antoncoding commented Nov 22, 2021

the benefit is to keep the complexity only in the Pricer, and won't make our role as Oracle Admin too powerful.
(with the new design, admin can force to write a settlement price first and pricers cannot override it, which is more centralized)

@aparnakr aparnakr closed this Dec 7, 2021
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 this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants