[feature]: add a flag --count_total_invoices to listinvoices

[Dhiren-Mhatre]

Change Description

Add a --count_total_invoices flag to the listinvoices RPC command, as requested in issue #9717. This allows users to efficiently count invoices without retrieving all invoice data, which is particularly helpful for large databases.

This implementation follows the same pattern as the existing --count_total_payments flag for the listpayments command.

Steps to Test

1. Build LND with the changes:

   make
   make install

2. Start LND in regtest mode:

   lnd --lnddir=~/lnd-test --bitcoin.regtest --bitcoin.active --bitcoin.node=neutrino --no-macaroons --no-rest

3. Create a wallet and unlock it:

   lncli --lnddir=~/lnd-test --no-macaroons create
   lncli --lnddir=~/lnd-test --no-macaroons unlock

4. Test the new flag:

   lncli --lnddir=~/lnd-test --no-macaroons listinvoices --count_total_invoices

5. Verify that the response includes the total_num_invoices field and doesn't include any invoice data.

Pull Request Checklist

Testing

• Your PR passes all CI checks.
• Tests covering the positive and negative (error paths) are included.
• Bug fixes contain tests triggering the bug to prevent regressions.

Code Style and Documentation

• The change is not [insubstantial](https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/blob/master/docs/code_contribution_guidelines.md#substantial-contributions-only).
• The change obeys the [Code Documentation and Commenting](https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/blob/master/docs/development_guidelines.md#code-documentation-and-commenting) guidelines, and lines wrap at 80.
• Commits follow the [Ideal Git Commit Structure](https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/blob/master/docs/development_guidelines.md#ideal-git-commit-structure).
• Any new logging statements use an appropriate subsystem and logging level.
• Any new lncli commands have appropriate tags in the comments for the rpc in the proto file.
• Added release notes describing the new flag.

This PR addresses issue #9717.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are limited to specific labels.

🏷️ Labels to auto review (1)

• llm-review

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[ZZiigguurraatt]

Nice work!

I'm wondering what happens if we have a database using KV schema? I don't see any clear error messages for when that is tried.

I think what you've implemented is a slightly different behavior than listpayments, but I think your way is probably the right way so I've created #9742 for listpayments

[Dhiren-Mhatre]

Nice work!

I'm wondering what happens if we have a database using KV schema? I don't see any clear error messages for when that is tried.

I think what you've implemented is a slightly different behavior than listpayments, but I think your way is probably the right way so I've created #9742 for listpayments

Thanks for the positive feedback!
Regarding key-value (KV) schema databases: The current implementation is tailored for SQL backends, as KV support is being phased out. If someone uses this flag with a KV backend, it will still attempt to count invoices, but less efficiently, as it would need to iterate through them instead of using a SQL COUNT operation.​
I haven't added explicit error messages for KV backends, but I can include them if you believe it's important.​
I'm glad my approach might be an improvement over the current listpayments implementation. Thanks for creating #9742 to ensure consistency!​

[NishantBansal2003]

After taking a look, it seems a few adjustments might still be needed. Specifically, you need to read RPC section of the Makefile documentation:
https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/blob/master/docs/MAKEFILE.md#rpc
It would be best if you could compile the code, test the changes locally, run the unit and itest to verify your changes, and ensure nothing is broken. Additionally, It would be great if you could add an itest for this change.

Also, please take a look at contribution guidelines:
https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/blob/master/docs/development_guidelines.md#ideal-git-commit-structure

[lightninglabs-deploy]

@Dhiren-Mhatre, remember to re-request review from reviewers when ready