pull down to refresh

244 sats \ 6 replies \ @optimism 10 Nov \ on: SN release: new micropayment engine meta
Hey @k00b I think that there's an accounting error (or that there was an accounting error before) in sats spent because I just went up on the top charts by 700k and I didn't spend 700k extra this weekend that I know of.
write
preview
112 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b OP 10 Nov
Thanks!
top attempts to aggregate everything but I know I haven't spent enough time trying to rid it of bugs yet. It's possible it didn't account for something before that it does now. Regardless, I'll add it to my list.
reply
162 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 10 Nov
apologies for adding shit to the list!
reply
100 sats \ 3 replies \ @k00b OP 15 Nov
You're hidden, so I can't verify it a glance, but I pushed a smattering of updates related to these aggregate lists that might've fixed this issue.
(Regardless I need to do some more serious verification testing around these before I put more faith in them.)
reply
100 sats \ 1 reply \ @optimism 18 Nov
Removed hidden stuff. My profile shows lower sats received than whats shown in top stackers / cowboys (I think profile is correct, at least versus what was shown before the update.) It's less difference than before though. I checked some random others and looks like this is for everyone.
reply
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b OP 18 Nov
Thanks!
The profile sats are (likewise) denormalized and were especially prone to this kind of divergence before I unified the increment logic.
I'll verify the accuracy of my aggregate queries and plan for a migration that recomputes the profile values.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 15 Nov
Looks much closer to what I expected it to be for me.
reply