You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Due to the first transaction in all groups being the same (send 0.002 Algo from sender to escrow for the fees), the transaction ID will be the same if you attempt to create two different swaps and send them within the same round.
The issue is similar to an old bug when you trying to trade 0.002 Algo for any other ASA and the group transaction would fail saying the transaction already exists, The resolution was to add "fee" into the node field. However because when you send two separate swaps each group has its own "fee" transaction with identical parameters, the second group will always fail because the fee transaction already exists in this round (if the round was different and the firstvalid and last valid were shifted by 1 it would be a different txid).
My temporary solution to this was to dump 8 random bytes of data into the note field instead of "fee".
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Due to the first transaction in all groups being the same (send 0.002 Algo from sender to escrow for the fees), the transaction ID will be the same if you attempt to create two different swaps and send them within the same round.
The issue is similar to an old bug when you trying to trade 0.002 Algo for any other ASA and the group transaction would fail saying the transaction already exists, The resolution was to add "fee" into the node field. However because when you send two separate swaps each group has its own "fee" transaction with identical parameters, the second group will always fail because the fee transaction already exists in this round (if the round was different and the firstvalid and last valid were shifted by 1 it would be a different txid).
My temporary solution to this was to dump 8 random bytes of data into the note field instead of "fee".
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: