Create eip to cap gas limit #3756
Conversation
|
Hi! I'm a bot, and I wanted to automerge your PR, but couldn't because of the following issue(s): @MicahZoltu @Arachnid @cdetrio @Souptacular @vbuterin @nicksavers @wanderer @gcolvin @axic |
|
@MicahZoltu updated, PTAL. |
| As of the fork block `N`, consider blocks with a `gas_limit` greater than | ||
| `30,000,000` invalid. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| As of the fork block `N`, consider blocks with a `gas_limit` greater than | |
| `30,000,000` invalid. | |
| As of FORK_BLOCK_NUMBER, consider blocks with a `gas_limit` greater than `30,000,000` invalid. |
This is the style we usually use for referring to the fork block number inline. Unless there is an argument for deviating from that I would prefer to stick to the normal style here (note: I also personally like the previous style, so I'm a bit biased).
|
|
||
| ## Specification | ||
|
|
||
| As of the fork block `N`, consider blocks with a `gas_limit` greater than |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It may be valuable to be more explicit about what exactly is invalid here. In this case it is the 10th RLP encoded item in the block header that must be a QUANTITY that is less than or equal to 30,000,000.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Counting RLP fields is too pedantic for readability. I think referencing EIP-1559 in the header and then "a block with gas_limit greater than 30,000,000" reads much better.
|
Can we go ahead and merge this as a draft? I'll update these things before review. |
EIPS/eip-3756.md
Outdated
| A valuable property of proposers choosing the gas limit is they can scale it | ||
| down quickly if the network becomes unstable or is undergoing certain types of | ||
| attacks. For this reason, we maintain their ability to lower the gas limit | ||
| _below_ 15,000,000. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you mean Gas target here?
EIPS/eip-3756.md
Outdated
| A valuable property of proposers choosing the gas limit is they can scale it | ||
| down quickly if the network becomes unstable or is undergoing certain types of | ||
| attacks. For this reason, we maintain their ability to lower the gas limit | ||
| _below_ 15,000,000. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| _below_ 15,000,000. | |
| _below_ 30,000,000. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we'd like to restrict something, shall we have a good benchmark first for all clients? And then discuss real gas limits of the clients.
| ## Test Cases | ||
| TBD | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| ## Test Cases | |
| TBD |
Recommend removing sections that aren't done yet, rather than leaving them stubbed out (only applies to sections that aren't required).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I actually like this TBD especially for the Test Cases as a reminder that we should add at some point.
|
@MicahZoltu updated again. |
|
I would highly suggest to add another section that addresses the concerns some people may have that the gas limit will never be raised again. We have seen dev limits in the past cause lots of controversy. Most notably the 1 MB block limit on Bitcoin. How will the Ethereum team reassure the community that this EIP will not lead to the same problem? Thank you :) |
|
Is the implementation simply this? |
|
Discussion about the general content of the EIP should be posted in the |
@MaxHastings It's not 1 MB right now: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/98810/whats-the-blocksize-limit-after-segwit-and-how-do-legacy-nodes-deal-with-segwit |
* create eip to cap gas taret * s/target/limit * rename file * clean up and add discussion link * typo
^