You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We can redesign the gas price algorithm to allocate as much of the total gas price to paying for DA costs. So we can limit the amount it can change total, but internally it can increase to e.g. 99% DA, 1% Exec.
i.e. if the Profit is negative, the algorithm will increase the DA Gas Price. Let’s say the DA gas Price is 2000 and the exec is 1000. This increase might result in a DA gas Price of 2200 and an exec of 1000, with a total of 3200. Instead we can just cap the total increase: 3000 → 3300, and not put any limit on the percentage of which that goes to DA. e.g. 3100 could be DA and 200 could be Exec. As long as we are covering the minimum costs of Executing txs, then the DA portion can serve two purposes: paying for DA costs and discouraging spamming.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We can redesign the gas price algorithm to allocate as much of the total gas price to paying for DA costs. So we can limit the amount it can change total, but internally it can increase to e.g. 99% DA, 1% Exec.
i.e. if the Profit is negative, the algorithm will increase the DA Gas Price. Let’s say the DA gas Price is 2000 and the exec is 1000. This increase might result in a DA gas Price of 2200 and an exec of 1000, with a total of 3200. Instead we can just cap the total increase: 3000 → 3300, and not put any limit on the percentage of which that goes to DA. e.g. 3100 could be DA and 200 could be Exec. As long as we are covering the minimum costs of Executing txs, then the DA portion can serve two purposes: paying for DA costs and discouraging spamming.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: