Please help. I unstaked my Solana on TrustWallet from 5 or so delegators at once. Since then, when I go to claim my rewards, I receive the following error: encoded solana_sdk::transaction::versioned::Versioned-Transaction too large: 1876 bytes (max: encoded/raw 1683/1232). There's no option to separate the transactions in TrustWallet. Please help! -A Noob
I've tried staking new amounts, unstaking that amount, changing the node settings on trustwallet, contacting trustwallet, trying to contact Soloana, etc.
I'm having the exact same issue. The problem is that Trust Wallet tries to claim from all validators at once, creating a larger than accepted transaction payload.
From Solana's website:
"Solana's networking stack uses a conservative MTU size of 1280 bytes which, after accounting for headers, leaves 1232 bytes for packet data like serialized transactions. Developers building applications on Solana must design their on-chain program interfaces within the above transaction size limit constraint."
So the issue needs to be solved by Trust, nothing Solana can do about this.
I reached out to customer support, but they just gave me a standard reply to update the app and make sure I have enough free SOL for transaction fees, which I do and has nothing to do with this error.
This is really annoying - the funds are stuck in the app while the price is in a freefall.
I'm trying to press them to open a bug ticket and solve this with the next update, but no reply yet.
Related
Does someone know what "sf_max_daily_api_calls" parameter in Heroku mappings does? I do not want to assume it is a daily limit for write operations per object and I cannot find an explanation.
I tried to open a ticket with Heroku, but in their support ticket form "Which application?" drop-down is required, but none of the support categories have anything to choose there from, the only option is "Please choose..."
I tried to find any reference to this field and can't - I can only see it used in Heroku's Quick Start guide, but without an explanation. I have a very busy object I'm working on, read/write, and want to understand any limitations I need to account for.
Salesforce orgs have rolling 24h limit of max daily API calls. Generally the limit is very generous in test orgs (sandboxes), 5M calls because you can make stupid mistakes there. In productions it's lower. Bit counterintuitive but protects their resources, forces you to write optimised code/integrations...
You can see your limit in Setup -> Company information. There's a formula in documentation, roughly speaking you gain more of that limit with every user license you purchased (more for "real" internal users, less for community users), same as with data storage limits.
Also every API call is supposed to return current usage (in special tag for SOAP API, in a header in REST API) so I'm not sure why you'd have to hardcode anything...
If you write your operations right the limit can be very generous. No idea how that Heroku Connect works. Ideally you'd spot some "bulk api 2.0" in the documentation or try to find synchronous vs async in there.
Normal old school synchronous update via SOAP API lets you process 200 records at a time, wasting 1 API call. REST bulk API accepts csv/json/xml of up to 10K records and processes them asynchronously, you poll for "is it done yet" result... So starting job, uploading files, committing job and then only checking say once a minute can easily be 4 API calls and you can process milions of records before hitting the limit.
When all else fails, you exhausted your options, can't optimise it anymore, can't purchase more user licenses... I think they sell "packets" of more API calls limit, contact your account representative. But there are lots of things you can try before that, not the least of them being setting up a warning when you hit say 30% threshold.
One customer had a problem where an incorrect email (from another customer) was assigned to a case. The incorrectly assigned email is a response to a case that was deleted. However, the current case has the same tracking token as the deleted one. It seems that the CRM system uses the same tracking token as soon as it is available again. This should not happen! Here Microsoft has a real programming error from our point of view. The only solution we see is to increase the number of numbers to the maximum so that it takes longer until all tracking tokens are used up. But in the end, you still reach the limit.
Is there another possibility or has Microsoft really made a big mistake in the way emails are allocated?
We also activated Smart Matching, but that didn't help in this case either, because the allocation was made via the Tracking Token first.
Thanks
The structure of the tracking token can be configured and is set to 3 digits by default. This means that as soon as 999 emails are reached, the tracking token starts again at 1, which is basically a thinking error on Microsoft's part.
If you have set "Automatic replies", these will be reached in the shortest possible time. We therefore had to increase the number to 9 digits, which is also not a 100% solution. At some point, this number of emails is also reached and then emails are again assigned to requests that do not belong together. Microsoft has to come up with another solution.
I send transactions programmatically and I need to know exactly how much the fee is going to be. I managed to figure out how to calculate fees for ordinary transaction ((transfer cost + receipt creation cost) * 2), but now I'm struggling with a case where I need all my funds out of the account without deleting it. As I understand, in this case there must be a storage rent left on the account. However, I can't really figure out how to calculate that rent. There is a value returned from 'EXPERIMENTAL_protocol_config' method that seem to be connected to rent - 'storage_amount_per_byte', which implies that each byte costs 10000000000000000000 yocto, and also I can get 'storage_usage' from 'query' method with request type 'view_account', which is supposedly indicated how many bytes my account uses (which is 182). But whenever I try to send a transaction, I get a 'NotEnoughBalance' error that states that transaction cost is higher than the balance, but just by 669547687500000000 yocto. Whatever I do, I can't understand where this number comes from. No combination of fees from aforementioned 'EXPERIMENTAL_protocol_config' method yields this number.
There seems to be little to no decent documentation on transaction fee calculation, except for some 'fixed' values for most used actions. If you have any info on fee/storage rent calculation - I'll be thankful for it.
Through a random chance, I managed to find out the name that the number '6695476875' is referred to as, 'Reserved for transactions', (in gas, not tokens) as in the official wallet (wallet.near.org). God knows why it is reserved, neither docs.near.org, nomicon.io nor wiki.near.org have any info regarding this 'reservation' and this number is never mentioned in any RPC API method. This number is also never mentioned in 'near-api-js' lib, so I really have no idea if devs are even aware of it.
Anyway, since the title of this problem is 'How to calculate storage rent', the answer is something like this:
You get account info from 'query' method of RPC API (here's the doc) and take the "storage_usage" value (this is the amount of bytes that your account takes up on the blockchain).
You get protocol info from 'EXPERIMENTAL_protocol_config' method of RPC API (here's the doc) and take the "storage_amount_per_byte" value.
You multiply the amount of bytes by the storage_amount_per_byte and add the magic 669547687500000000 number to it.
And the resulting number is the least amount of tokens that you must have at your account at any time.
I don't know why it is a common practice to make lives of developers harder in blockchain industry, but this is a good example of such practice.
I want to create an app to have a detailed info about historical stake and reward changes for each block. Can I track every delegation events that contain any stake balance changes of delegator/validator? Including information like:
delegator address
validator address
amount of tokens that got delegated, undelegated or receive rewards
I found this contract. And then I tried decode transaction's actions and receipts. I still can not find info about amount.
For example this transaction contain unstake_all method. I tried using Near REST API or Postgres DB like
postgres://public_readonly:nearprotocol#mainnet.db.explorer.indexer.near.dev/mainnet_explorer
But, it does not include info about amount but explorer does:
#ojosdepez.near unstaking 211362599667478202066742666. Spent 186315320307823908119982990 staking shares. Total 211362599667478202066742667 unstaked balance and 0 staking shares
Contract total staked balance is 18374491513732210121091349309226. Total number of shares 16197043740284605773282183202762
So can I somehow get these logs using REST API or Postgres and are these logs reliable source? Or if there is any other method to find staking/reward amount info?
First of all
But, it does not include info about the amount but explorer does:
#ojosdepez.near unstaking 211362599667478202066742666. Spent 186315320307823908119982990 staking shares. Total 211362599667478202066742667 unstaked balance and 0 staking shares
Contract total staked balance is 18374491513732210121091349309226. Total number of shares 16197043740284605773282183202762
Explorer queries the RPC and shows you the logs from ExecutionOutcome.
In the PostgreSQL database for Indexer for Explorer, we don't store logs, so you can't find them there.
To have a detailed info about historical stake and reward changes for each block, I think you should index the blockchain by yourself to be sure everything is calculated as you expected.
In order to do this, you'd need to build an indexer. Happily, we're releasing an MVP (yet completely working solution) of NEAR Lake Framework which is a microframework to build indexers but even easier than it is done before now.
Please, have a look at the example project https://github.com/near/near-lake-raw-printer which basically prints the data from each block. Refer to this comment as an example of the structure that you can receive for each block (StreamerMessage) https://github.com/near/near-lake/issues/1#issuecomment-1035285658
So the main idea is to start indexing from the block where rewards became available (Phase 2) and analyze each block, transaction, and receipt related to staking/unstaking so you can perform your calculations and record the info about historical stake and reward changes.
I have already prepared the Candy Machines for minting an NFT collection in the Solana network, and I am testing the Mint process using its Devnet.
Even if you can find a lot of tutorials about how to prepare the candy machines, there are some questions that I am still not able to find the right answer and I think that could be useful for other users.
Does the Mint need to be one by one? If a user would like to buy, for example 50 NFTs, does it require approving 50 transactions and pay 50 times the fees (using Phantom or any other wallet)?
I assume that yes, because every minted NFT is a new contract. Am I right?
I am successfully doing a Mint in the Devnet using my Phantom wallet in order to determine the fees. For a single NFT, the transaction fee reflected in the wallet is 0.012SOL = 2.16$ at this time. It seems really expensive based on what a transaction in Solana should cost. How are these fees calculated? Is this the normal fee price that a user pay for minting 1 NFT?
To answer both your questions:
The mint does not need to be one by one (from a mint site I am assuming is what you mean). You can string multiple transactions together like what this repo has achieved: https://github.com/maxwellfortney/next-candy-machine
Note: this repo is for cmv1 which is no longer supported but can be simply adjusted to work with cmv2 as the transactions themseleves should be similar.
Yes, that is a normal fee for minting. Transactions (transfering tokens or sol) themselves on solana are extremely cheap but storing data is not as cheap. To store data (such as is required by an NFT as they need a URI for the metadata) some "rent" costs are involved, as defined in the solana docs https://docs.solana.com/implemented-proposals/rent. Basically you have to pay for the NFT to store this data and exist which is the minting fees you are witnessing, a tiny fraction of the price you pay is for transferring the NFT to your wallet.
Mints are usually done one by one, but someone could hand code a transaction to do multiple, especially with Candy Machine V1.
The rent collected depends on the amount of bytes stored for each NFT. You can check how much it will cost with solana -um rent <bytes>. You can find more information here
I recently update the candy machine to v2, and it has some interesting features as minting more than one NFT or handle a whitelist of wallets:
https://docs.metaplex.com/candy-machine-v2/getting-started
for your second question, you can maybe think to use an external service that handles the transaction fees.
In this way you'll be able to let you customer get the NFT without paying any fee.
If you are interested in implementing a similar external solution, I guess that this APIs Service is for you: cowsigner.com
You can also solve your first point, because when you create a transaction, you'll be able to add as many instructions as you want to it.
For anything else, just drop a simple comment below :)