Skip to content

support /fapi/v3/account #698

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 23, 2025
Merged

support /fapi/v3/account #698

merged 2 commits into from
Apr 23, 2025

Conversation

vlw
Copy link
Contributor

@vlw vlw commented Apr 13, 2025

No description provided.

@vlw vlw force-pushed the master branch 2 times, most recently from d200e4a to 60b08b5 Compare April 13, 2025 20:07
@carlosmiei
Copy link
Collaborator

@vlw I don't think this is needed anymore since the upgrade was done in place right?

@vlw
Copy link
Contributor Author

vlw commented Apr 14, 2025

I don't think this is needed anymore since the upgrade was done in place right?

What do you mean you don't need it? The current /fapi/v2/account is already deprecated and uses 10 API rate limit, the new /fapi/v3/account uses 5 API rate limit (see https://www.binance.com/en/support/announcement/detail/19d4e3cd0758426584dd9686eb56ec64 ). But the V3 response contains less useful data, e.g. no entry price in position information, but isolated wallet information (which was not present in v2). Also V3 request is processed faster.

@vlw
Copy link
Contributor Author

vlw commented Apr 14, 2025

As long as binance provides the ability to use API v2 and v3, we should also provide the same to users

@carlosmiei
Copy link
Collaborator

@vlw sorry my bad, I was assuming you were already replacing the v2/account here: https://github.com/ccxt/go-binance/pull/699/files

it is indeed the same endpoint but a different topic

@carlosmiei
Copy link
Collaborator

@vlw My question is, do we really need to keep supporting v2? can't we make this replacement in place?

@vlw
Copy link
Contributor Author

vlw commented Apr 14, 2025

My question is, do we really need to keep supporting v2? can't we make this replacement in place?

I think we should leave both versions as we did in positionRisk. In /fapi/v3/balance it was possible to do that, because there the content of the response didn't change at all. In account/v3 the structure of the response has changed, so it should be a separate interface so you don't get unexpected problems in user programs after the library update.

@vlw vlw force-pushed the master branch 2 times, most recently from d200e4a to 60b08b5 Compare April 14, 2025 19:46
Copy link

@Copilot Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)

v2/futures/client.go:532

  • [nitpick] Consider clarifying this comment to explicitly mention that the service targets the '/fapi/v3/account' endpoint for better context.
// NewGetAccountV3Service init getting account service

v2/futures/account_service.go:129

  • [nitpick] Consider updating the comment to indicate that GetAccountV3Service is specifically for retrieving account information from the '/fapi/v3/account' endpoint.
// GetAccountV3Service get account info

@carlosmiei carlosmiei self-assigned this Apr 23, 2025
@carlosmiei carlosmiei merged commit f73fcce into ccxt:master Apr 23, 2025
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants