You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Currently, we can represent the same trading pair two different ways (BTC/LTC or LTC/BTC). In cxdbsql we just keep one table which has one of the assets first, and the other second. So there will only be regtest_litereg and not litereg_regtest. Instead, there should be one way of representing an asset pair. #15 should be done before this.
Describe the solution you'd like #15 will give a nice ordering of assets, so maybe the lower asset ID can always go first. Trading pairs can have two non-equal Asset ID's, pairs will be unique if they are ordered.
Describe alternatives you've considered
The greater asset ID could go first, but it really doesn't matter.
Additional context
N/A
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Rjected
added
feature
New feature or request
refactor
Code necessary for long-term code quality but will involve lots of abstraction & generalization
labels
Jun 3, 2019
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Currently, we can represent the same trading pair two different ways (BTC/LTC or LTC/BTC). In
cxdbsql
we just keep one table which has one of the assets first, and the other second. So there will only beregtest_litereg
and notlitereg_regtest
. Instead, there should be one way of representing an asset pair. #15 should be done before this.Describe the solution you'd like
#15 will give a nice ordering of assets, so maybe the lower asset ID can always go first. Trading pairs can have two non-equal Asset ID's, pairs will be unique if they are ordered.
Describe alternatives you've considered
The greater asset ID could go first, but it really doesn't matter.
Additional context
N/A
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: