`solana stakes <vote pubkey>` should cleanly handle a non-vote pubkey

[mvines]

solana stakes <identity pubkey> or solana stakes <does not exist pubkey> all silently return nothing.

Lets:

• If possible make solana stakes <identity pubkey> report the stakes from the corresponding vote account
• solana stakes <does not exist pubkey> report that the account was not found
• solana stakes <some other account pubkey> report that the account is invalid

[stale[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

[CriesofCarrots]

This still seems helpful

[deven96]

@CriesofCarrots I'd be willing to have a go at this. Any helpful information would be appreciated

[CriesofCarrots]

@deven96 , that would be great! I think the changes would likely go in this case: https://github.com/solana-labs/solana/blob/976298b292534155c4c9d54743240011f85840c8/cli/src/cluster_query.rs#L1716

The implementation should probably be something like:

• call RpcClient::get_vote_accounts
• Check each provided pubkey for existence in node_pubkey or vote_pubkey fields from that response
• Build new vote-pubkey array from vote_pubkeys that were either provided or mapped from node_pubkeys
• If any provided pubkeys are not present as either a node_pubkey or vote_pubkey, return an error. Open to suggestions as to whether any unknown pubkey should halt the process entirely, or just print the error and continue with valid pubkeys.

I'm also not certain we need to distinguish between account not found and account invalid as the issue description indicates. Happy to hear your thoughts on that.

[deven96]

@CriesofCarrots printing the error and continuing with valid pubkeys seems fair. Also I'm of the opinion a general error with the account is okay but if we could further make it granular then fine

[fee1-dead]

@deven96 are you still working on this?

[deven96]

Yes please @fee1-dead

[kubanemil]

@CriesofCarrots I wanted to take this issue, do you know why the last PR solving it was closed? As far as I can see it was a viable solution, wanted to finish it. Is it relevant?

[CriesofCarrots]

@kubanemil , you are very welcome to work on this. As far as I can tell, the previous PR had outstanding suggested changes, but the author disappeared. I have not yet looked at that code closely myself. I did, however, start working on this myself at point. I would say the trickiest piece is gathering the needed account information without adding a bunch of expensive RPC calls.

Anyway, I am happy to answer specific questions if you have them. Otherwise, I will keep an eye out for a PR from you to review.

[kubanemil]

@CriesofCarrots I have opened PR for this issue, but it is closed by chidocibot with following message:

Thank you for the contribution! This repository is no longer in use. Please re-open this pull request in the agave repo: https://github.com/anza-xyz/agave

Is it okay?

[CriesofCarrots]

@kubanemil , please follow the direction to open the pull request in the agave repo.

[kubanemil]

@CriesofCarrots please can you look at my PR?

[CriesofCarrots]

I saw the PR come through over the weekend. Extra pings not necessary.