storage market accounts, do not stop loadinng account after asset match

[jeremyletang]

closes #2122

[vega-ci-bot]

system-tests failed.

=== Test summary ===
../../grpcTesting/governance/newMarketGovTests.py .....................x [ 47%]
........................                                                 [100%]
../../grpcTesting/governance/newMarketTradesTests.py ............        [100%]
../../grpcTesting/margins/marginsTests.py x..x                           [100%]
../../grpcTesting/markets/marketsTests.py ..............                 [100%]
../../grpcTesting/orders/amendOrdersTests.py .ssssssssssssssssssssssssss [ 81%]
ssssss                                                                   [100%]
../../grpcTesting/orders/cancelOrdersTests.py .....................s.s   [100%]
../../grpcTesting/orders/generalOrdersTests.py .............             [100%]
../../grpcTesting/orders/limitOrdersTests.py ............                [100%]
../../grpcTesting/orders/marketOrdersTests.py ........                   [100%]
../../grpcTesting/orders/mixedOrdersTests.py ..................sss       [100%]
../../grpcTesting/orders/negativeOrdersTests.py ........................ [ 57%]
....x..ssssss.s...                                                       [100%]
../../grpcTesting/parties/partiesTests.py ..                             [100%]
../../grpcTesting/trading/positionsTests.py ..                           [100%]
../../grpcTesting/trading/tradesTests.py FF............                  [100%]
 testCheckFeesAggresiveSell 
 testCheckFeesAggresiveBuy 
../../grpcTesting/wallet/walletTests.py ................................ [ 91%]
.s.                                                                      [100%]
../../rest/orders/negativeOrdersTests.py .                               [100%]

[qustavo]

LGTM

We have the same pattern in GetFeeInfrastructureAccounts, you think we need to remove the break statement there as well?

[jeremyletang]

LGTM

We have the same pattern in GetFeeInfrastructureAccounts, you think we need to remove the break statement there as well?

Yes same patttern is here, but in the case of the infrastructure fee account we will get one infrastructure fee account per asset only, the early exit makes sense there as as soon as we find the account for the required asset, we know it's the only one.

It was the same thing until recently for the market account as we were looking only for the insurance pool account, although we added the Liquidity fee account recently, which indeed was not returned if we were breaking after we find the first account with matching asset.

[edd]

LGTM
We have the same pattern in GetFeeInfrastructureAccounts, you think we need to remove the break statement there as well?

Yes same patttern is here, but in the case of the infrastructure fee account we will get one infrastructure fee account per asset only, the early exit makes sense there as as soon as we find the account for the required asset, we know it's the only one.

It was the same thing until recently for the market account as we were looking only for the insurance pool account, although we added the Liquidity fee account recently, which indeed was not returned if we were breaking after we find the first account with matching asset.

Could you put in a comment so that's clear @jeremyletang? Then I'm happy to merge it.

[jeremyletang]

LGTM
We have the same pattern in GetFeeInfrastructureAccounts, you think we need to remove the break statement there as well?

Yes same patttern is here, but in the case of the infrastructure fee account we will get one infrastructure fee account per asset only, the early exit makes sense there as as soon as we find the account for the required asset, we know it's the only one.
It was the same thing until recently for the market account as we were looking only for the insurance pool account, although we added the Liquidity fee account recently, which indeed was not returned if we were breaking after we find the first account with matching asset.

Could you put in a comment so that's clear @jeremyletang? Then I'm happy to merge it.

done

[vega-ci-bot]

system-tests failed.

=== Test summary ===
../../grpcTesting/governance/newAssetTests.py ..F......x............x.ss [ 89%]
sss                                                                      [100%]
 testDepositBuiltInAmtGreatMaxDep 
../../grpcTesting/governance/newMarketGovTests.py .....................x [ 47%]
........................                                                 [100%]
../../grpcTesting/governance/newMarketTradesTests.py ............        [100%]
../../grpcTesting/margins/marginsTests.py x..x                           [100%]
../../grpcTesting/markets/marketsTests.py ..............                 [100%]
../../grpcTesting/orders/amendOrdersTests.py .ssssssssssssssssssssssssss [ 81%]
ssssss                                                                   [100%]
../../grpcTesting/orders/cancelOrdersTests.py .....................s.s   [100%]
../../grpcTesting/orders/generalOrdersTests.py .............             [100%]
../../grpcTesting/orders/limitOrdersTests.py ............                [100%]
../../grpcTesting/orders/marketOrdersTests.py ........                   [100%]
../../grpcTesting/orders/mixedOrdersTests.py ..................sss       [100%]
../../grpcTesting/orders/negativeOrdersTests.py ........................ [ 57%]
....x..ssssss.s...                                                       [100%]
../../grpcTesting/parties/partiesTests.py ..                             [100%]
../../grpcTesting/trading/positionsTests.py ..                           [100%]
../../grpcTesting/trading/tradesTests.py FF............                  [100%]
 testCheckFeesAggresiveSell 
 testCheckFeesAggresiveBuy 
../../grpcTesting/wallet/walletTests.py ................................ [ 91%]
.s.                                                                      [100%]
../../rest/orders/negativeOrdersTests.py .                               [100%]