-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
[2.0] Unconfirm at transmission is not reflected (Under certain conditions) #418
Comments
I investigated this for two evenings on the testnet and this is what I have found: Call of nem.com.websockets.requests.account.transactions.recent initiated from dataBridge.service.js during connecting to a new node triggers also delivering of unconfirmed transactions on "/unconfirmed/ " websocket subscription/channel (subscribed via nem.com.websockets.subscribe.account.transactions.unconfirmed)Interestingly, it triggers it also for other clients connected to the same NIS (testnet) node!!! (I don't know if this is a NIS bug or feature) This could be used to create a "workaround" - just call nem.com.websockets.requests.account.transactions.recent in a loop (i.e. every 10-20s, from dataBridge.service.js, use another injected parameter $interval; I tried that, works like a charm) nem.com.websockets.requests.account.transactions.recent in a loop has a disadvantage - it also deliveres last 25 transactions on /recenttransactions/ channel, which could get costly; better would be to implement nem.com.websockets.requests.account.transactions.unconfirmed, directly in nem-sdk (account.js; I tried also that, works like a charm, too)I think this could solve several recuring issues where unconfirmed (multisig) transactions are involved. Notes:
|
Ok, this is getting even weirder. Setup: I have two cosigners, on different machines, both are logged in (both are subscribed to websockets), each uses different node. a) 1st cosigner initiates the transaction from slave account to self (so it is both initiator and recipient). It is not indicated in the "unconfirmed" tab anywhere. That means: one clients call to nem.com.websockets.requests.account.transactions.recent causes update on another client! That can result in total undeterministic mess. There is definitely something very wrong in how NIS handles websocket connections/channel subscriptions. Could someone from NIS side (pretty please) shed some light in here? @BloodyRookie ? @Jaguar0625 ? |
Update: |
Environment: MacOS Latest & Universal version.
I think that it is the same in other environments.
Expected Behavior
When transmitting a NanoWallet, if the transaction becomes Unconfirm, "Tin!" Sounds.
Current Behavior
If the NanoWallet is open for a long time, the sound (Tin!) At the time of remittance is not sounded when it becomes Unconfirm.
And it is not reflected in Unconfirm.
It occurs at a high frequency.
Possible Solution
The current countermeasure that you can do is to change Node.
That will correctly recognize Uncomfirm.
Is WebSocket expired?
Steps to Reproduce
(Important) There is not a problem with first selected Node
Details
UPnP is not used, so I think it is a session relationship.
Imagine if WebSocket will expire if it is a long time.
It may be better to set the port of WebSccket as a router so that it can be accessed from the outside.
What do you think of this idea?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: