Include plotNFT rewards in get_farmed_amount

[wallentx]

Purpose:

chia get farm summary currently only returns values for OG plots.
Since the majority of people have long since switched to plotNFT plots, I'm not sure why pooling wallets are being excluded from this calculation.

Current Behavior:

chia rpc wallet get_farmed_amount

{
  "blocks_won": 114,
  "farmed_amount": 96752754128478,
  "farmer_reward_amount": 28500000000000,
  "fee_amount": 2754128478,
  "last_height_farmed": 3810216,
  "last_time_farmed": 1686871581,
  "pool_reward_amount": 68250000000000,
  "success": true
}

chia farm summary

Farming status: Farming
Total chia farmed: 96.752754128478
User transaction fees: 0.002754128478
Block rewards: 96.75
Last height farmed: 3810216
...

New Behavior:

chia rpc wallet get_farmed_amount

{
  "blocks_won": 114,
  "farmed_amount": 284002754128478,
  "farmer_reward_amount": 28500000000000,
  "fee_amount": 2754128478,
  "last_height_farmed": 6609397,
  "last_time_farmed": 1739076254,
  "pool_reward_amount": 255500000000000,
  "success": true
}

chia farm summary

Farming status: Farming
Total chia farmed: 284.002754128478
User transaction fees: 0.002754128478
Block rewards: 284.0
Last height farmed: 6609397
...

Testing Notes:

I don't know if the changed calculations here would result in some negative behavior elsewhere, like in the GUI.

[emlowe]

It's been that way since the first pools support. My guess is that the idea was those rewards go to the pool, so you shouldn't show them because someone might get confused why the farmed amount isn't in their wallet? But probably no-one has a real good recollection on this

[wjblanke]

This will probably break people's scripts if they depend on it. I wouldn't be against a RPC/CLI option to include these numbers, if you are willing to change it to that it would get my approval.

[wallentx]

@wjblanke sure!
Do you have any thoughts on how you'd want to differentiate the data by name, and which you'd like to present by default?

The current chia farm summary shows what appears to me to be farmed rewards that do not include the plotNFT plots.. Just OG plots. Like the plots before we had NFT "Pooling" plots.

What are the proper "in-the-code" names we have that differentiate ye olde plots from the newer ones?

This PR as it is currently, seems to display rewards that include OG rewards + plotNFT plot rewards.

For ME, the difference between the Total chia farmed and Block rewards value is that the Block rewards value just looks to be rounded to the nearest hundredth XCH.
I'm not sure if those numbers would ever be different for other people or not, so if this value is redundant, I'm happy to replace the redundant info with something like Blocks since last win or something.

[emlowe]

I believe the suggestion is as follows:

• default remains as current code - that is if you type chia farm summary you get the same answer pre and post PR
• new option (say --include-pool-plots) so you can include those in the chia farm summary report.
• there is no change to any output labels or any other changes other than totals:

chia farm summary

Farming status: Farming
Total chia farmed: 96.752754128478
User transaction fees: 0.002754128478
Block rewards: 96.75
Last height farmed: 3810216
...

chia farm summary --include-pool-plots

Farming status: Farming
Total chia farmed: 284.002754128478
User transaction fees: 0.002754128478
Block rewards: 284.0
Last height farmed: 6609397
...

[wallentx]

I ended up going with -i/--include-pool-rewards, since that seemed to be the most accurate and consistent description with regard to the code.
I also included some additional detail output that is relevant to pool-rewards, and only shows up if using the above flags.

[coveralls-official]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 14713451425

Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.

This pull request's base commit is no longer the HEAD commit of its target branch. This means it includes changes from outside the original pull request, including, potentially, unrelated coverage changes.

• For more information on this, see Tracking coverage changes with pull request builds.
• To avoid this issue with future PRs, see these Recommended CI Configurations.
• For a quick fix, rebase this PR at GitHub. Your next report should be accurate.

Details

• 12 of 21 (57.14%) changed or added relevant lines in 5 files are covered.
• 14 unchanged lines in 8 files lost coverage.
• Overall coverage increased (+0.03%) to 91.22%

---

Changes Missing Coverage	Covered Lines	Changed/Added Lines	%
chia/cmds/farm_funcs.py	6	15	40.0%

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
chia/daemon/server.py	1	84.3%
chia/full_node/full_node_api.py	1	85.3%
chia/rpc/wallet_rpc_api.py	1	90.76%
chia/wallet/wallet_node.py	1	87.82%
chia/full_node/full_node.py	2	87.63%
chia/timelord/timelord.py	2	81.42%
chia/rpc/rpc_server.py	3	88.54%
chia/wallet/wallet_state_manager.py	3	96.96%

Totals
Change from base Build 14670885217:	0.03%
Covered Lines:	100781
Relevant Lines:	110370

---

💛 - Coveralls

[github-actions]

This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request.

[wjblanke]

Will can u fight through these import renames. I promise to get it merged after this. Thanks

[wallentx]

Will can u fight through these import renames. I promise to get it merged after this. Thanks

Yep, had a baby exactly 1 month ago, and have hardly had time to touch a keyboard since. Will get to this.

[wallentx]

@wjblanke I managed to get working tests, and worked out all the conflicts.

[wallentx]

@wjblanke codecov failing for lack of codecov on a test file 😵‍💫

[jack60612]

@wallentx i reminded @wjblanke

[jack60612]

lgtm

[wjblanke]

aok! for main

[jack60612]

Approved for merge despite coverage!