[backport] pd: fix behavior of simulation RPC #4733
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
## Describe your changes Fixes the behavior of the simulation RPC for pairs with no liquidity, so that the simulation results correspond to what would happen if there were a swap. ## Issue ticket number and link ## Checklist before requesting a review - [x] If this code contains consensus-breaking changes, I have added the "consensus-breaking" label. Otherwise, I declare my belief that there are not consensus-breaking changes, for the following reason: > rpc only changes (cherry picked from commit 2429c16)
TalDerei
approved these changes
Jul 22, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Describe your changes
Backports the RPC fix in #4731 to the
release/v0.79.xbranch, in preparation forv0.79.2.Issue ticket number and link
Only #4731
Checklist before requesting a review
If this code contains consensus-breaking changes, I have added the "consensus-breaking" label. Otherwise, I declare my belief that there are not consensus-breaking changes, for the following reason: