feat: add supply and borrower count to core pool #120
Conversation
coreyar
force-pushed
the
update-core-supplier-and-borrower-count
branch
3 times, most recently
from
150108b to
7ab894b
Compare
coreyar
force-pushed
the
update-core-supplier-and-borrower-count
branch
9 times, most recently
from
0dae85e to
8435df8
Compare
| 'MINT', | ||
| 'REDEEM', | ||
| 'BORROW', | ||
| 'REPAY', | ||
| 'SEIZE', | ||
| 'LIQUIDATE', | ||
| 'TRANSFER', | ||
| 'ENTER_MARKET', | ||
| 'EXIT_MARKET', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
From the outside it looks the same as before, just that it's not using the constants declared above
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah this because of an assembly script error. I can investigate further
| if (event.params.accountBorrows == event.params.borrowAmount) { | ||
| // if both the accountBorrows and the borrowAmount are the same, it means the account is a new borrower | ||
| market.borrowerCount = market.borrowerCount.plus(oneBigInt); | ||
| market.borrowerCountAdjusted = market.borrowerCountAdjusted.plus(oneBigInt); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Question: does it make sense to apply the same dust rule here if you borrow a real small amount? Although I do see the difference between borrowing and liquidating
There was a problem hiding this comment.
that is an interesting question. It is unlikely that a user will borrow such a small amount but if they did I think it should count as a borrow because it was an action taken by a user.
In this case we are trying to differentiate between actually live positions and positions that were closed by liquidators but remained open because of dust
coreyar
force-pushed
the
update-core-supplier-and-borrower-count
branch
from
8435df8 to
b19bcf2
Compare
Adds supply and borrower count to core subgraph
A borrowerCountAdjusted value is added that removes accounts that were liquidated with only dust left