-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 494
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.
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
Group exchange partial orders with same OrderID #7771
Comments
The trades view will go away eventually and will be combined with the history events view, so we have a global history view. The problem will persist however, since the way our system is built is not totally trivial to do this. Possible maybe, but not trivial. Someone else had also asked about this. And the issue got closed since it's not something in our plans: #1768 It's not a priority for us but since you are the 2nd person to ask I will leave the issue open to keep track of it in case anything comes up and it turns out in our refactorings, it's an easy change to do. |
Abstract
Group partial orders with same OrderID, and make them expandable (+) / collapsible (-)
Motivation
When placing an exchange order, chances are the order will be filled by multiple partial orders. And sometimes a lot of partial orders. But I am usually only interested in the totals (has the order been filled completely, if not, how much was filled in absolute and relative terms). From what I remember when I was playing around with exchange API's these partial orders usually had a global UID that was the same for all, and another ID that identified the individual orders. This should make it fairly simple to group partial orders and present them as a single line. If you want to see the specifics, you can expand them and see the individual partial orders. It would reduce the "flooding" of the Exchange Trades view and provide the user with the relevant information in a glance. I am honestly surprised how many of the exchanges I use don't have this feature.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: