Andre’s bots have spent $25k on gas costs on 2020-09-02 alone. That’s a monthly gas budget burned in a single day. I’ve pulled some data for this specific day to illustrate my point.
I propose to rework the performance fee to refund the full gas cost for the harvester before sending the remaining amount (if any) to the TreasuryVault contract. This needs to be addressed urgently since we are already in the red.
Fully support this - longer term the plan is for more gas optimizations
Vance
yes, must happen. critical.
For.
What happens if the harvest amount is lower than gas cost?
for this
meme tax included below
fully support – critical IMO
Sounds absolutely necessary. 100% for this.
no brainer, shut up and take my money
Can we vote on it yet?
Can we reduce the Harvest and earn frequency? Can we also put a threshold for harvest? You already made a mempool based gas oracle which can be used for threshold.
Support this but there is already a YIP proposal request to implement a performance fee on the vaults in favor of YFI holders. If refund gas fee is implemented, YFI holders would not earn much today, as you say the fees outweigh the earnings. Already 80% of YFI aren’t staked. Implement this and you will see more people sell their YFI or quit staking. We can’t just remove the financial incentive to stake governance tokens. I propose to approve both.
These are clearly different proposals and I believe they should be polled separately.
I’ll post the vote when I draft the specification, should be ready soon.
This will also be an expedited YIP with 1 day duration. Gotta YIP this fast!
It’s clear there are several optimizations to discuss here, and that’s a different topic.
I will just share a very simple general approach:
gas costs should be deducted before whatever profit is distributed.
a cost is a cost.
companies have costs, a protocol like yearn has blockchain infrastructure costs.
It would great to find a solution to this nonsense costs, so we don’t need to discuss this, but until then it’s a running cost of operations.
In support of this.
I know there’s an ongoing discussion of a higher performance fee, but I think it’s important to focus on passing this first. Delivering a sustainable project that is useful to end-users is what brings value to the platform.
What happens if the harvest amount is lower than gas cost?
Strategies in the future should probably have a pot to account for the gas costs. Maybe have it payout to the harvester directly, and anyone who’s willing can call harvest when conditions are met (i.e. when the pot in the strategy covers gas, along with when other existing conditions are met).
Fully support. Let’s do this.
I support this . also we might concider using other Network like TronLink…
I agree on the need to adjust fees, but if the if any part is needed, then surely the bots could use reworking too. Nobody benefits from a harvest where gas costs exceed profits.
We’ve done about 4 harvests and 7 earn calls per vault on that day. The compounding effect of multiple harvests per day is slim. Harvesting less often slightly increases exposure to price movements of CRV (and other bonus tokens) during the day, but it will make very little difference in the grand scheme of things.
Is this true? Should we harvest less? Any hard numbers on this?
Agree to take costs out before distributing profits, no brainer.
Also agree we need to optimise harvest calling. But should be separate yip
