-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.8k
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
Deal with negative feed back loop in DA gas price #2364
Deal with negative feed back loop in DA gas price #2364
Conversation
6db49f4
to
6249d48
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice stuff! A few suggestions from my end.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you have an idea of the value you want to put in the threshold. You are saying that we should aim to be in normal
range but right now on Ignition there is only 0 or 1 tx per block (excluding mint tx) and so the threshold seems hard to find given this granularity (0 or 1) and I'm having hard times to understand how we can maintain normal
range in these conditions
In a healthy network, I would want to keep it low, like 5% or 10%. We won't know for sure until we have a lot more data though.
This is a very good point. But safety mode only comes into play if we are trying to increase the gas price (we are unprofitable). Currently, the cost of posting blobs is so low that even if the DA gas price is set to the minimum, it will might still be profitable for us. Also, until the network gets more active, I think we should just swallow the costs of DA as a business. So, it's fine if most blocks are below the threshold. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The L2ActivityTracker
needs a small update to reflect the new parameters. Otherwise this looks good to me.
Co-authored-by: Mårten Blankfors <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM 👍
0bb7c3f
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Re-approving 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Even more test youhouuu
Linked Issues/PRs
#2347
Description
Checklist
Before requesting review