Ethereum developers evaluate that data transmission costs will be reduced by 5 times, and EIP-4488 becomes a possible solution – Technology Bitcoin News


Since the end of June, Ethereum, the second largest crypto asset, has been dealing with high fees. Today, the average transaction fee for Ethereum is between US$5 and US$34 per transfer. Although there have been many complaints about the cost of Ethereum this year, Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin recommended an Ethereum Improvement Proposal (EIP) that aims to reduce transaction costs by five times. Ethereum developer Tim Beiko also discussed this idea and talked about possible long-term and short-term “challenges.”

The cost of moving Ether, transferring ERC20, and exchanging tokens on Ethereum is high-Tim Beiko shares EIP-4488 Insights

After the London upgrade in the first week of August, it was thought that EIP-1559 would at least relieve some of the pressure. However, after the London upgrade reached $62 per transfer on November 9, average transaction network fees continued to rise. bitinfocharts.com Indicates that the average Ethereum fee is 0.0083 Ethereum Each transfer, or $34.09.Web portals l2fees.info Show one Ethereum The transaction is as low as US$5.77 per transfer, but the cost of transferring ERC20 is US$13.20, and the cost of each exchange for exchanging ETH-based tokens is US$28.27.

November 22, Bitcoin.com news Report Regarding the debate between Ethereum and Avalanche advocates on crypto forums and social media platforms (such as Twitter). As blockchains like Binance Smart Chain, Avalanche, Terra, Solana, Harmony, Near, Fantom and others have been attracting Ethereum users and use cases, Ethereum is now highly competitive. Now, high fees seem to be pushing developers to take measures to address the expensive natural gas costs. On November 26th, Ethereum developer Tim Beiko shared Recent developers have discussed and talked about the idea of ??reducing aggregation costs.

The cost of natural gas further boosted the Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Butrin It is proposed to use a name EIP-4488. Buterin suggested on Github on November 24: “Reduce transaction calldata gas cost and increase the limit on how many total transaction calldata can be in a block.” In essence, this solution can significantly reduce data transaction costs, and estimate It is said that the cost of natural gas can be reduced by five times. EIP-4488 utilizes a scheme called “calldata”, which is used for L2 (Layer 2) solutions such as Optimistic and ZK aggregation. Beiko talked about possible solutions in his Twitter post on Friday.

“The cost of aggregating txns is a function of the data they send back to the Ethereum mainnet,” Beiko Said“If X transactions are aggregated and compressed and Y gas fee is paid to submit them to the main network, the cost of the aggregated transaction is a function of Y/X. To this end, the aggregate will add calldata to their transactions, and the current pricing is per Byte 16 gas. If we reduce the cost of calldata, then we reduce the cost of aggregate transactions,” the programmer Add toBeiko further stated that one of the challenges of the calldata solution is that it “affects the block size of Ethereum”.Bezi continue:

It is actually the data we add to each transaction. If we reduce the gas cost and keep the same gas limit, then we will have larger blocks, which will be problematic in the short and long term. In the short term, it will increase the worst-case block size.For example, if calldata is 1 gas/byte and there is a 30m gas block, you will get a 30MB block (the current average is

EIP-4444, EIP-4490 and the upcoming Arrow Glacier upgrade

Currently, Ethereum (Ethereum) Either users do not use Ether for transactions at all, but take advantage of the expensive L1 (layer 1) network fees, or they are using aggregate layer solutions. At the time of writing, the L2 solution is much cheaper than the L1 fee, and the cost of sending Ethereum through Loopring can be as high as $0.25 per transfer. Polygon Hermez is priced at US$0.25, Zksync is priced at approximately US$0.27, Optimism is priced at US$2.39, and Arbitrum One’s transfer price is US$2.43. Beiko’s post points out that L1 costs are high, but L2 costs are also quite expensive.

“The cost of Ethereum is *high*, and it is not trivial in today’s summary (about 3-4 USD) Ethereum Send OR and ZKR of about 0.25c), so it’s worth considering more trade-offs,” Beiko Said. In addition to talking about EIP-4488, software programmers also mentioned EIP-4444 (Execute binding history data in the client) with EIP-4490“Customers must stop providing historical titles, texts and receipts for more than one year on the p2p layer,” EIP-4444 describes. The summary of EIP-4444 adds:

The client can prune these historical data locally-this change will result in a reduction in network bandwidth usage, because the client adopts a lighter synchronization strategy based on the weakly subjective assumption of PoS.

The Ethereum developer’s Twitter post also tells people about the upcoming Arrow Glacier upgrade on December 8, which aims to postpone the network’s difficulty bomb. When open source programmers are ready to solve network problems, alternative blockchain networks continue to develop after Ethereum.

Tags in this story

Arbitrator One, Arrow Glacier Upgrade, Call data, Developer, Difficulty bomb, EIP-4444, EIP-4488, EIP-4490, Ethereum, ether, Ether fee, Ethereum (ETH), Ethereum blockchain, Fee reduction, gas, Natural gas cost, L1, L1 fee, L2, L2 fee, Ring, optimism, Polygon Hermez, prune, Fee reduction, Aggregate transaction, Summary, Zoom, technology, Beco team, Vitalik Butrin, Synchronize

What do you think of the recent solutions proposed to solve the high transmission cost of the Ethereum network? Please tell us your thoughts on this topic in the comments section below.

Image Source: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wikimedia Commons

Disclaimer: This article is for reference only. It is not a direct offer or invitation to buy or sell, nor is it a recommendation or endorsement of any product, service or company. Bitcoin Network Does not provide investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. The company or the author is not directly or indirectly responsible for any damage or loss caused or claimed to be caused by using or relying on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.





Source link