Skip to content
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

DynamicFee and BaseFee Pallets #1296

Open
albertov19 opened this issue Feb 6, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

DynamicFee and BaseFee Pallets #1296

albertov19 opened this issue Feb 6, 2024 · 2 comments
Labels

Comments

@albertov19
Copy link

Question

Frontier template includes both DynamicFee pallet and BaseFee pallet.

Is this necessary? Both pallets are included but it seems only BaseFee is used

Dynamic Fee: https://github.com/polkadot-evm/frontier/blob/master/template/runtime/src/lib.rs#L372-L374
Base Fee: https://github.com/polkadot-evm/frontier/blob/master/template/runtime/src/lib.rs#L382-L392

Fee Calculator:

type FeeCalculator = BaseFee;

I'm just wondering if there is something I missed :)

@boundless-forest
Copy link
Collaborator

Is this necessary? Both pallets are included but it seems only BaseFee is used

It's hard to say whether that's necessary. These two pallets are two types of FeeCalculator implementations. The template runtime is intended as a reference for the beginner who wants to integrate the Frontier components. Keep these two pallet configurations in the runtime as an example for the users to adapt. But it also brings some confusion. It seems better to use the simplest static FeeCalculator in the template runtime and add some comments that other implementations can be chosen.

@albertov19
Copy link
Author

Agree, I just feel it is also confusing to have both pallets active in the template, while only one of them is being used. Tanssi EVM Appchains had both pallets active as well -> moondance-labs/tanssi#403

Feel free to close the issue if you think current template is fine as is.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants