Skip to content

Update EIP-3403: reopen #9431 (eip-3403) #9673

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

gap-editor
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@gap-editor gap-editor requested a review from eth-bot as a code owner April 22, 2025 20:39
@github-actions github-actions bot added c-update Modifies an existing proposal s-stagnant This EIP is Stagnant t-core labels Apr 22, 2025
@eth-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

eth-bot commented Apr 22, 2025

File EIPS/eip-3403.md

Requires 1 more reviewers from @holiman, @vbuterin
Requires 1 more reviewers from @g11tech, @lightclient, @SamWilsn

@eth-bot eth-bot added the a-review Waiting on author to review label Apr 22, 2025
@eth-bot eth-bot changed the title reopen #9431 (eip-3403) Update EIP-3403: reopen #9431 (eip-3403) Apr 22, 2025
Copy link

The commit 74cfb99 (as a parent of 6bc81b7) contains errors.
Please inspect the Run Summary for details.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the w-ci Waiting on CI to pass label Apr 22, 2025
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ Gas refunds for SSTORE and SELFDESTRUCT were originally introduced to motivate a
Gas refunds additionally have multiple harmful consequences:

* Refunds give rise to GasToken. GasToken has benefits in moving gas space from low-fee periods to high-fee periods, but it also has downsides to the network, particularly in exacerbating state size (as state slots are effectively used as a "battery" to save up gas) and inefficiently clogging blockchain gas usage
* Refunds increase block size variance. The theoretical maximum amount of actual gas consumed in a block is nearly twice the on-paper gas limit (as refunds add gas space for subsequent transactions in a block, though refunds are capped at 50% of a transaction's gas used). This is not fatal, but is still undesirable, especially given that refunds can be used to maintain 2x usage spikes for far longer than EIP 1559 can.
* Refunds increase block size variance. The theoretical maximum amount of actual gas consumed in a block is nearly twice the on-paper gas limit (as refunds add gas space for subsequent transactions in a block, though refunds are capped at 50% of a transaction's gas used). This is not fatal, but is still undesirable, especially given that refunds can be used to maintain 2x usage spikes for far longer than [EIP-1559](https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1559) can.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
* Refunds increase block size variance. The theoretical maximum amount of actual gas consumed in a block is nearly twice the on-paper gas limit (as refunds add gas space for subsequent transactions in a block, though refunds are capped at 50% of a transaction's gas used). This is not fatal, but is still undesirable, especially given that refunds can be used to maintain 2x usage spikes for far longer than [EIP-1559](https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1559) can.
* Refunds increase block size variance. The theoretical maximum amount of actual gas consumed in a block is nearly twice the on-paper gas limit (as refunds add gas space for subsequent transactions in a block, though refunds are capped at 50% of a transaction's gas used). This is not fatal, but is still undesirable, especially given that refunds can be used to maintain 2x usage spikes for far longer than [EIP-1559](./eip-1559) can.

better to self refer EIPs

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
a-review Waiting on author to review c-update Modifies an existing proposal s-stagnant This EIP is Stagnant t-core w-ci Waiting on CI to pass
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants