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
currently, staking rewards are low, because fees are distributed according to the voting power of all stakers, including vesting contracts. This should be changed. The plan is to only distribute fees to voluntary stakers.
Currently, the staking contract is not differentiating between the 2 types of stakers (vesting vs voluntary), therefore we need to adjust the staking contract.
Option 1:
Additional checkpoints for weighted stake / voting power of vesting contracts
In fee sharing proxy, subtract that number from total weighted stake / voting power
In fee sharing check if sender is vesting contract
-> higher costs for vesting, but does not affect regular stakers in any way
-> fee sharing a bit more expensive
Option 2:
2 seperate balances for weighted stake / voting power: stakers and vesting contracts
Sum them up on total weighted stake / voting power computation
Fee sharing proxy reads only the stakers weighted stakes
-> same costs for vesting + staking
-> higher costs for all operations which read from the staking contract (voting + fee sharing)
Since the contracts were designed to keep the reading inexpensive, it is probably better to go with option 1, but this is up for discussion.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In this case we will need to add logic only for adding checkpoints for vestings rather than stakers + vestings.
a) We need to update logic for adding checkpoints in case of new stakes for vesting contracts.
b) We also need to migrate/initiate checkpoints for already existings stakes for vesting contracts (another advantage to use option 1, because for option 2 we will need to migrate/initiate checkpoints for stakers + vestings).
We can use new vesrion of VestingRegistry in order to get list of all vesting contracts for item 1b.
Concerns:
Higher costs for vesting - we will need to check block gas limit for stakes for vesting contracts.
Probably, migration/initiation of checkpoints for old vestings can't be executed in one transaction.
currently, staking rewards are low, because fees are distributed according to the voting power of all stakers, including vesting contracts. This should be changed. The plan is to only distribute fees to voluntary stakers.
Currently, the staking contract is not differentiating between the 2 types of stakers (vesting vs voluntary), therefore we need to adjust the staking contract.
Option 1:
-> higher costs for vesting, but does not affect regular stakers in any way
-> fee sharing a bit more expensive
Option 2:
-> same costs for vesting + staking
-> higher costs for all operations which read from the staking contract (voting + fee sharing)
Since the contracts were designed to keep the reading inexpensive, it is probably better to go with option 1, but this is up for discussion.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: