To reduce the number of spam transactions in the network, we are increasing the minimum gas price to 30Gwei from the current (default) value of 1Gwei for our foundation nodes.
It’s just a recommendation to increase the gas price, but other validators are free to choose their own min gas price.
If you want to change it, here are the instructions:
~/node/bor/start.sh file and add following flag -
--miner.gasprice '30000000000' \
This setting might not be there in your
start.sh as we were using the default value earlier, so you will have to add this line. Please note the
\ at the end of the line if it’s not the last line of the bor invocation command.
Note: Minimum Gas Price is not a network level setting, but it is a node client level setting and validators are free to choose the value that they desire.
Showing the world how centralized this project is.
Has this already been applied without notice? is it a temporary measure or is it going to be final?
@Mitsu @naxeras , we have changed it in the nodes we are running already.
@nodefather , as mentioned in the post, this change has been recommended to reduce the spam txns in the network. As it is a client level configuration, you are free to run your node with old/different settings as per your wish.
1 to 30 is 30x increase. should be more lower. network utilization so low rn.
suitable rate is 5 or 10
@ssandeep you are right but in real life, what the user perceives is that he is paying 30X for the same transactions and contract interactions. 5X or 10X like @mu_hai suggests sounds more reasonable.
Incredible decision and maybe even worse roll-out communication wise. Less than 10 hours after this post the effect of the gwei raise (by 3000%) the costs for minting a NFT ticket increased 30 fold (averaged). This increased the ‘blockchain costs in USD’ of our NFT ticketing drastically. We have issued more than 300 000 NFT tickets ( receipts here https://explorer.get-protocol.io/) over the last 2.5 months. With this volume this new policy adds up(especially as we are ramping up). To be clear, we have enough margin on our product to make it work for the DAO and our clients, however the fact Polygon is a blockchain solution that can in a blink increase our cost base 30 fold shakes our thesis in choosing Polygon for our NFT ticketing.
We are not spamming. Our relayers operate a NFT ticketing business(GET Protocol - https://www.get-protocol.io/) over the last 3 months we have issued 300 000 NFT tickets for ‘main stream’ clients using Polygon. Tickets like these: https://opensea.io/assets/matic/0x2055244a719229d669488e389388f2d653a452f4/31354 and here in our own explorer: https://explorer.get-protocol.io/ticket/31354 these are tickets held by users, no spam at all, just actual real world adoption…
I am a developer myself, a few months ago we worked together on resolving a tx-propagation issue on the polygon nodes. So I have quite deep understand of Geth, making me wonder; what is the logic behind increasing it with 30 times at once? Why not incrementally increase it until the result of less spam transactions is achieved? What other options where considered? Why did the changes need to go in effect immediately? The network was incredibly stable for the last 3/4 weeks, what was the trigger (that made you 10x the gwei)? Why didn’t power users like me notice this (I assume significant trigger event/phenomenon) as we mint 10-40 000 NFTs a day?
I hope I can get some good solutions and context on what went down here and what the future holds (more gwei raises?). Our protocol is built incredibly agnostic and we are able to still have our protocol work and have already issued tickets remain operational/valid even if we migrate blockchains(something we do not want, but if this can happen at any moment, we are forced to consider).
I was (and I guess I still am) a huge Polygon proponent but these events have absolutely shocked my thesis. I hope this doesn’t mean we’ll have to spit ways.
Very bad decision. Polygon is already facing fierce competition from other cheap L1 chains like SOL, AVAX, and soon ADA. Right now you make DeFi 30x most costly, I think Polygon instantly lose it’s edge because there is no more sub-pennies DeFi transactions anymore, why would people still use Polygon?
No wonder many people said Polygon is a A+ project in terms of technology and community, but a total failure in terms of PR/marketing.
The network is not congested at all in the last few weeks, why suddenly 30x the gas price now? Gradually changing it to 3 or 5 gwei would be more appropriate.
Bad PR. The blockchain news tomorrow will be about Polygon 30x it’s gas price. What a terrible decision by the devs without even notifying the community and the users.
I’m really interested in knowing how consensus is reached on these decisions, certainly feels like a DAO needs to be in place.
This is exactly what will happen when a software engineer (no offense) managing the product, marketing and community.
You really need to hire a real product manager.
I don’t see the big deal here. So many stuck txns over the last 2-3 weeks with nodes not picking them up due to the 1 gwei spam. It’s a client side decision and validators can choose to not increase their base fee if they prefer, and a standard transaction cost will still sit at a paltry .00063 MATIC.
Feels like a good move to me to ensure network usability and a bit of stability.
There is nothing wrong with rolling out policies to combat ‘1 gwei spamming’. I would understand and be in favor for a gwei increasing strategy to target spammers. However this policy is putting the minimum x30 from nowhere and with no notice (or discussion). It sets a weird precedent for users that are building consumer facing products on Polygon. If they raise it with 30x out nowhere now, what assurances do I have that they wont raise it with another x10 in a few weeks?
I would assume that the 30x number was picked so they wouldn’t have to increase it anytime in the near future; effectively capturing the typical “high gas” level. Not everything is precedence for a slippery slope fallacy.
Curious to see if any faucets step up to increase their donations.
I’d prefer not to have to assume or speculate so much on what could happen in the near future - about something so fundamental. As i already said I(we) have no issue with increasing gwei at all. Its the fact there was no notice, process or specification that is creating the largest liability.
i went to use quickswap for the first time today to swap some wrapped usdc for matic to pay for fees and lo and behold the 0.001 they start you with is not enough to cover tx a single tx. i found faucets and I’ll be collecting for 6 days before i can swap usdc for MATIC on quick swap so that i can actually use the platform. and i moved 50 matic to my wallet… 16 withdrawal fee just to get hit with a 130$ gas fee on the matic bridge. now i get to throw away another 16 matic to move it back. i can understand fixing spam but this was obviously not well thought out and anybody that’s not currently established on polygons l2 is basically forced into spending enormous amounts on gas and withdrawal fees to cover their first basic transaction. i don’t know how you expect to grow when this is the new user experience.
The wallet found on https://wallet.polygon.technology has a gasless swap that allows you to exchange non-MATIC tokens for MATIC. It’s good to retain at least .1 MATIC in your wallet at all times as just regular old network surges will cause the price to jump as well, not just the base fee increase.
Regarding the bridge, it’s bad because it interacts (twice) with the Ethereum Mainnet, where gas is increasingly more stupid due to the NFT craze and Shib bullrun. Use the video found here to offramp to an exchange for pennies: Liquidate From Polygon Network For Less Than 10 Cents! | ETHERMINE - YouTube
I appreciate the reply but the exchange you refer to is quickswap which i can’t use because i dont already have matic in my poly wallet. also binance.us does not allow MATIC withdrawals to anything other than ERC20