You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Note: not sure if they used launchpad or other tools
Potential cause
From my poor Dapp experience and code trace, I think Launchpad doesn’t set a specific gas limit, so it is using the eth_gasEstimate RPC call result to set the gas limit.
I suspect the gas estimate was inaccurate when deposit call congestion happened because the TX ordering was unknown; therefore, the user may get out of gas error. Does that make sense?
However, in my previous deposit on Holesky launchpad (via metamask, see here), the gas limit was much larger than the gas used.
Thank @parithosh and users for helping report it.
Issue
Issue on Holesky:
Issue on Mainnet:
I checked the deposit txs since January 1st, 2023, and there are 32 similar cases by 4 different senders.
For example: https://etherscan.io/tx/0x1f0058046a81d08edcf2c6cd720836434269ee22121e5425311f760451feb0ca
Note: not sure if they used launchpad or other tools
Potential cause
From my poor Dapp experience and code trace, I think Launchpad doesn’t set a specific gas limit, so it is using the
eth_gasEstimate
RPC call result to set the gas limit.The deposit contract FV report said the best-to-worst gas cost is between [46162, 157642].
A hypothesis
I suspect the gas estimate was inaccurate when deposit call congestion happened because the TX ordering was unknown; therefore, the user may get out of gas error. Does that make sense?
However, in my previous deposit on Holesky launchpad (via metamask, see here), the gas limit was much larger than the gas used.
/cc @CarlBeek @wackerow for consulting 🙏
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: