Add events for withholding node rewards #562
Conversation
contracts/FlowIDTableStaking.cdc
Outdated
| /// Epoch | ||
| access(all) event NewEpoch(totalStaked: UFix64, totalRewardPayout: UFix64, newEpochCounter: UInt64) | ||
| access(all) event EpochTotalRewardsPaid(total: UFix64, fromFees: UFix64, minted: UFix64, feesBurned: UFix64, epochCounterForRewards: UInt64) | ||
| access(all) event NodeRewardsSetToSlash(nodeSlashPercentagesRemaining: {String: UFix64}) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's useful to differentiate between withholding rewards and slashing. In my view, slashing is a punitive measure for a protocol violation where part of a node's initial stake amount is confiscated.
I don't think we should refer to withholding rewards as slashing in general. In particular if we plan to pursue performance-based rewards, that blurs the line even further between "getting more rewards for good performance" and "getting less rewards for worse performance".
| access(all) event NodeRewardsSetToSlash(nodeSlashPercentagesRemaining: {String: UFix64}) | |
| // The single parameter is a map from node ID to the percentage of rewards that will be withheld from | |
| // node at each subsequent payout, until the withholding map is modified again. | |
| access(all) event NodeRewardWithholdingsUpdated(nodeRewardWithholdings: {String: UFix64}) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, you're right, I forgot about the naming distinction. Thanks for the correction! I'll update it
contracts/FlowIDTableStaking.cdc
Outdated
| access(all) event RewardTokensWithdrawn(nodeID: String, amount: UFix64) | ||
| access(all) event NetworkingAddressUpdated(nodeID: String, newAddress: String) | ||
| access(all) event NodeWeightChanged(nodeID: String, newWeight: UInt64) | ||
| access(all) event NodeRewardsSlashed(nodeID: String, percentageSlashed: UFix64) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| access(all) event NodeRewardsSlashed(nodeID: String, percentageSlashed: UFix64) | |
| access(all) event NodeRewardsWithheld(nodeID: String, percentageWithheld: UFix64) |
joshuahannan
changed the title
|
should we include a ReasonCode? and then have a table either on chain or just in the docs to begin with which has the mapping of |
|
That is a good idea. I will probably need you to create that page in the docs site though because you'll know those better than I do. Once that page is on the docs site, I can add a link to it in a comment in the contract. Do we think just having the reason code as a |
i don't think we will have more than 2^8 (256) reasons so UInt8 sounds good. |
Closes #446
Adds two events to indicate when nodes are marked to get their rewards withheld and when the withheld rewards are actually calculated