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: Populate historic entries for new auction table #3055

Closed
sunce86 opened this issue Oct 14, 2024 · 1 comment
Closed

chore: Populate historic entries for new auction table #3055

sunce86 opened this issue Oct 14, 2024 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@sunce86
Copy link
Contributor

sunce86 commented Oct 14, 2024

Background

A new competition_auctions table is being introduced with PR #2980. While this PR will populate new entries, we also need to backfill historical data, as the necessary information already exists in other tables. This will allow us to drop other tables.

Details

Populate the auctions table using existing data from the following sources:

auction_id – from solver_competition table
block – from solver_competition table field auctionStartBlock
deadline – from settlement_scores table; if missing, set to 0 or use the value of block
order_uids – from solver_competition or auction_orders table
prices – from solver_competition or auction_prices table
surplus_capturing_jit_order_owners – from surplus_capturing_jit_order_owners table

@sunce86
Copy link
Contributor Author

sunce86 commented Nov 4, 2024

Executed manually on all staging and production databases.

Few hiccups on production databases where we had gaps due to failure to save auctions caused by #3088

Another hiccup was on mainnet production for auction 3278851 that somehow has solver_competition.json = null. For this one, I think it's fine to not have entry in competition_auctions.

@sunce86 sunce86 closed this as completed Nov 4, 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.

1 participant