subgraphs
subgraphs copied to clipboard
messari
Bancor-V3 Ethereum Issue
Bancor team brought up that there is a difference in TVL compared to our subgraph
Etherscan of V3 vault: https://etherscan.io/tokenholdings?a=0x649765821D9f64198c905eC0B2B037a4a52Bc373
I suspect the issue is that we are measuring their deposits (they are single sided) and our subgraph doesn't reflect the current deficits in the pools (this was noted here in the original QA: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Yg4JvsYiCccmQhhVwUKvfWffXSB165GyqaVbvGRc82o/edit#gid=0). Will respond to them and raise issues if needed.
@steegecs Our current subgraph measures deposits/staked amount for each pool. their protocol has faced some deficit in those pools so the amount in the vault doesn't represent our reporting TVL. Our TVL matches the staked amount on their analytics page. I am waiting for their feedback and will ping you in a day or so. Just adding you because you worked on the original QA.
https://analytics.bancor.network/
@steegecs so we talked to Bancor. the current pool and TVL is based on the staked amount. we should change to amount in the pools. the staked amount is different from the pool amount.
https://etherscan.io/tokenholdings?a=0x649765821D9f64198c905eC0B2B037a4a52Bc373
would it be possible to change this? i can do a quick QA after to make sure it is good. not a huge deal, we had documented this issue before and it seems the bancor team recommends doing amounts in pool vs staked amount.
@bye43 Yeah, this got backlogged. Bancor asked us to calculate their pool TVL and amount by how much is there and not how much was deposited. They are facing a deficit and surplus in certain pools. May want to assign someone who is free.
ACTION: Ensure our methodology reflects our subgraph mappings, and explain that there is a difference in the README OR change our methodology.
