Content
@
0 reply
26 recasts
26 reactions
Roberto Bayardo 🎩
@bayardo.eth
Regarding Base transaction fees: they are high because the chain is at its target capacity (2x the throughput of the L1), but demand has increased dramatically. Data fees remain insignificant thanks to EIP-4844 blobs which are still far from capacity! So while "it could be worse..." what can make it better? (cont)
8 replies
26 recasts
156 reactions
obvs ((internet of money))
@obvs
What are your thoughts on past experiments in pumping the gas limit (let’s say Polyon in the early days, then BSC and others). State growth is an issue for L1 because of the type of home users they target long before it’s an issue for professional infrastructure providers.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Roberto Bayardo 🎩
@bayardo.eth
Both BSC and Polygon are great examples of how NOT to push the limits, as they suffered bad chain halts and other issues, and both those chains are basically impossible for anyone to sync from scratch now.
4 replies
1 recast
7 reactions
obvs ((internet of money))
@obvs
BSC yes, but I believe that’s more to do with rushed code changes to geth than the block limit. I would expect syncing to rely more on snapshot for the L2 than it be a full sync from genesis. I realise the architectures differ, but how is Arbitrum currently handling this?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Roberto Bayardo 🎩
@bayardo.eth
Oh they had to pull their block limit back at least once, so they definitely got too carried away there. Granted geth has improved a lot since then. Don't know how high Arbitrum is provisioned but I don't see particularly high tx throughput there either.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
obvs ((internet of money))
@obvs
Thanks for the response! Had a feeling they were just cranking the numbers a bit (although arguably the correct strategy here, in my opinion)
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
