Expand #3313 test #3514
Expand #3313 test #3514
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @TheBlueMatt ,
While trying to solve this issue, I ran into some questions and roadblocks. Would love to get your insights on these. Thanks!
| // ??: The amount need to be modified to match the total amount received to bob, why? | ||
| let amt_msat = nodes[0].node.list_usable_channels()[0].next_outbound_htlc_limit_msat + 1000; // Force MPP |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It looks like the amt_msat needed to be changed to ensure it matches the amt_msat Bob receives. I’m not entirely sure why this change is required—would you happen to have any insights on why this might be happening?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe this is because test_default_channel_config() sets htlc_minimum_msat to 1000 so it gets rounded up in the router. Probably fine to just make this change, for that reason.
| match events[0] { | ||
| Event::PaymentSent { .. } => {}, | ||
| Event::PaymentPathFailed { .. } => panic!("Received PaymentPathFailed"), | ||
| _ => panic!("Unexpected event") | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The test ran successfully, but instead of the payment going through, it actually fails. I’m not sure if this is due to how I designed the test or if it’s unexpected behaviour in the code. Any insights you could share would be super helpful. Thanks so much, Matt!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IIRC, there needs to be a second channel opened between Alice and Bob so that Alice has a payment path to retry over. Will also need to adjust the Retry passed to pay_for_offer above.
Resolves #3320
This PR expands the test introduced in #3313 to include claiming the payment on-chain after Alice's node reloads. It ensures that, once we verify Alice's node does not reattempt paying a duplicate invoice, the payment process is also completed successfully.