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

Optimism Security Costs - Missing CTC Submitter #11

Open
MSilb7 opened this issue Jun 3, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

Optimism Security Costs - Missing CTC Submitter #11

MSilb7 opened this issue Jun 3, 2022 · 4 comments

Comments

@MSilb7
Copy link

MSilb7 commented Jun 3, 2022

Optimism 'One Day Security Costs' are only showing costs for the State Commitment Chain (SCC) Submitter, but it is missing fees payed by the Canonical Transaction Chain (CTC) Submitter (i.e. it shows $39k for June 2, 2022 when the actual value is 78.7 ETH ~$143k)

Adding costs paid by Canonical Transaction Chain 0x6887246668a3b87F54DeB3b94Ba47a6f63F32985 submissions would resolve the issue.

Charts for Reference: https://dune.com/optimismpbc/optimism-l1-batch-submission-fees-security-costs

@smartcontracts
Copy link
Contributor

Can confirm that the numbers being shown on the site are off.

Using the adapter we see Optimism is spending 100k:

image

But page only shows 30k:

image

@MSilb7
Copy link
Author

MSilb7 commented Jun 14, 2022

Hi, following up, it seems like this is still not reading to l2fees.info properly.

@dmihal
Copy link
Owner

dmihal commented Jun 17, 2022

Hey @MSilb7 @smartcontracts, sorry for the delay

Here's the CryptoStats adapter that generates this data, I'm guessing some addresses need to be added?

https://cryptostats.community/discover/rollup-l1-fees/rollup-gas-consumed

By the way, we're currently tracking the EOAs, but we'll be switching to tracking the contract addresses itself soon.

@smartcontracts
Copy link
Contributor

@dmihal from what I can tell, the adapter itself looks correct but the data being presented on the site seems off. Sometimes the data is correct, but other times it seems to be excluding one address or the other. Here's an example:

For 2022-06-12 L2Fees shows the following info:
2022-06-17_11-18_1

Checking the adapter for that date (note that the adapter is off-by-one, so when clicking 2022-06-12 it'll do the query for 2022-06-11, which is fine and makes sense), we can see that it matches the expected values:
2022-06-17_11-19_1

Now for 2022-06-11 L2Fees shows:

2022-06-17_11-18

And the adapter shows mismatched values:
2022-06-17_11-19_2

Values for Arbitrum seem to match no matter what.

I noticed that the adapter sometimes returns zero. Is it possible that one of the two address queries returns zero by accident and is therefore sometimes skipped? If the backend for L2fees is caching this value, then that would make sense.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants