Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jan 15, 2021. It is now read-only.

Claimable Withdraw should be upper bounded by available balance #339

Closed
fleupold opened this issue Dec 21, 2019 · 6 comments
Closed

Claimable Withdraw should be upper bounded by available balance #339

fleupold opened this issue Dec 21, 2019 · 6 comments

Comments

@fleupold
Copy link
Contributor

If I create a withdraw request for a large amount, it will show that amount in the UI even though my available balance in the exchange wallet might be much smaller.

Would it make sense to "upper bound" the amount displayed by the amount available in the exchange?
Screen Shot 2019-12-21 at 12 05 50

@alfetopito
Copy link
Contributor

I though we did that, but apparently not. Thanks for reporting it. I agree this is a better ux.

@anxolin
Copy link
Contributor

anxolin commented Dec 26, 2019

Mm, I'm afraid I didn't understand. How can you request to withdraw more than you have?

image

@fleupold
Copy link
Contributor Author

I believe I used etherscan to request my withdraw. If the UI in itself doesn’t allow for this consider it low pri.

However, how does one request an optimistic withdraw “in advance” if it’s capped at the currently available balance?

@anxolin
Copy link
Contributor

anxolin commented Dec 27, 2019

Good question, we don't allow "optimistic withdraw" as we defined the user workflow for the user

Do you think we should allow it for this version? Not sure if it makes that part sense for now.

@alfetopito
Copy link
Contributor

Since the UI itself does not allow this behaviour, is there still something to be done?

I'll close this issue for now. Feel free to re-open if there's any action to be taken.

@fleupold
Copy link
Contributor Author

Note, that this issue is very related to gnosis/dex-contracts#539

The smart contract itself doesn't allow you to read the available balance but in js you could read contract storage at the right address in order to fetch it.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants