Skip to content

[e2e] fix: e2e test for metagraph expected not matching #3137

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 5 commits into from
Closed

[e2e] fix: e2e test for metagraph expected not matching #3137

Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
ff090d7
.
camfairchild Nov 7, 2025
cd99765
one more fix
basfroman Nov 7, 2025
1cccb5a
pending_root_emission + alpha_out_emission
basfroman Nov 11, 2025
1c003db
main based changes
basfroman Nov 11, 2025
2555f65
fix for first block test
basfroman Nov 13, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
12 changes: 7 additions & 5 deletions tests/e2e_tests/test_metagraph.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -199,7 +199,9 @@ def test_metagraph_info(subtensor, alice_wallet, bob_wallet):
alice_subnet_netuid = subtensor.get_total_subnets() # 2
subtensor.register_subnet(alice_wallet, True, True)

metagraph_info = subtensor.get_metagraph_info(netuid=1, block=1)
block = 1
Copy link
Contributor

@thewhaleking thewhaleking Nov 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does this need to be block = registration block + 1? Otherwise it's just always using the first block, which is happens before the subnet is even created. But even then we're basically checking a blank slate.

Copy link
Collaborator

@basfroman basfroman Nov 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

in this part of the test we compare first blocks

alpha_per_block = 1
metagraph_info = subtensor.get_metagraph_info(netuid=1, block=block)

expected_metagraph_info = MetagraphInfo(
netuid=1,
Expand All @@ -209,18 +211,18 @@ def test_metagraph_info(subtensor, alice_wallet, bob_wallet):
network_registered_at=0,
owner_hotkey="5C4hrfjw9DjXZTzV3MwzrrAr9P1MJhSrvWGWqi1eSuyUpnhM",
owner_coldkey="5C4hrfjw9DjXZTzV3MwzrrAr9P1MJhSrvWGWqi1eSuyUpnhM",
block=1,
block=block,
tempo=100,
last_step=0,
blocks_since_last_step=1,
subnet_emission=Balance(0),
alpha_in=Balance.from_tao(10).set_unit(1),
alpha_out=Balance.from_tao(1).set_unit(1),
alpha_out=Balance.from_tao((1 + block) * alpha_per_block).set_unit(1), # it's been 2 blocks
Copy link
Contributor

@thewhaleking thewhaleking Nov 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why has it been 2 blocks if we're checking at block 1?

tao_in=Balance.from_tao(10),
alpha_out_emission=Balance(0).set_unit(1),
alpha_out_emission=Balance.from_tao(block * alpha_per_block).set_unit(1), # 1 alpha per block
alpha_in_emission=Balance(0).set_unit(1),
tao_in_emission=Balance(0),
pending_alpha_emission=Balance(0).set_unit(1),
pending_alpha_emission=Balance.from_tao(0.820_004_577).set_unit(1), # minus owner cut already
pending_root_emission=Balance(0),
subnet_volume=Balance(0).set_unit(1),
moving_price=Balance(0),
Expand Down
Loading