-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 77
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
SIMD-0084: Disable rent fees collection #84
Conversation
2c05bab
to
b33ed51
Compare
Without rent payments, can we eliminate the concept & term of "rent" entirely?
|
This only eliminates rent collection (and distribution), so the concept of rent still remains. We could rename it to "Minimum Balance", since that's what it effectively will be now. (But renaming is probably not worth it; I imagine the Rent sysvar address is used in programs.) |
Yeah. We still want to enforce that all new accounts are rent exempt.
…On Thu, Nov 16, 2023, 16:53 Brooks ***@***.***> wrote:
Without rent payments, can we eliminate the concept & term of "rent"
entirely?
- How confident are we with the current minimum balance
calculation(s)? If we remove rent, it seems this would become more
difficult to change in the future.
- If the concept of rent goes away, should the Rent sysvar continue to
be available?
This only eliminates rent *collection* (and distribution), so the concept
of rent still remains. We could rename it to "Minimum Balance", since
that's what it effectively will be now.
(But renaming is probably not worth it; I imagine the Rent sysvar address
is used in programs.)
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#84 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABVSJGZJPC6ADLXCQCRGF3YE2KQLAVCNFSM6AAAAAA65D54GCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQMJVGQ2DCOJWGI>
.
You are receiving this because you were assigned.Message ID:
***@***.***
.com>
|
Right I was essentially asking this. If no one pays "rent", it's not really "rent" but a minimum required balance. I was definitely not suggesting we get rid of the minimum balance. That still leaves my other question about if we're comfortable with the current minimum balances we have now. Does that make sense? |
With disks going cheaper and cheaper in future, I think, most likely, we will only lower the minimum required balance in future. |
Yep, definitely agree. I wrote up some thoughts adjacent to this last year (#8), but haven't done more work since. Tl;dr is that I'd rather have a fee market for storage and have people pay at allocation time instead of carrying a minimum balance. |
Co-authored-by: lheeger-jump <126003637+lheeger-jump@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: lheeger-jump <126003637+lheeger-jump@users.noreply.github.com>
When the feature - "disable rent fees collections" is activated, rent will no | ||
longer be collected from accounts nor will it be distributed to validators. | ||
|
||
Note that this does **not** change the requirement that existing rent-paying | ||
accounts, which need to be made rent-exempt first before any withdrawals can be | ||
make from them. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's probably worth noting the specific protocol changes:
- Slot boundaries no longer do eager rent collection
- Slot boundaries no longer do lazy rent collection
- The
rent_epoch
value of all accounts in the network is2^64-1
(which would allow database implementations to repurpose this metadata field)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should any of these points be addressed still?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
These are good observations and notes. But I don't think these points are relevant to the simd design changes. I prefer not to include them in the content of the SIMD.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Works for me.
The part about rent_epoch
is interesting, as we'd like to reuse that field as well. I agree isn't not directly related to this SIMD, since this SIMD purposely does not touch/change accounts. While all the accounts likely have a rent epoch of MAX, we do not guarantee that (yet), and this SIMD is not meant to address that change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@HaoranYi Looks like there is consensus on the technical changes installed by this SIMD. All the remaining review comments are regarding terminology. We can fix terminology later, I am therefore approving.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this change looks great. If we can get an approval from Anza, we can get it merged ASAP, as it does not have any new comments.
@brooksprumo @jeffwashington What do you think about this SIMD? Can we merge it? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nit: Please standardize on rent paying
or rent-paying
. Since we already use rent-exempt
, I'd lean towards rent-paying
.
When the feature - "disable rent fees collections" is activated, rent will no | ||
longer be collected from accounts nor will it be distributed to validators. | ||
|
||
Note that this does **not** change the requirement that existing rent-paying | ||
accounts, which need to be made rent-exempt first before any withdrawals can be | ||
make from them. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should any of these points be addressed still?
Co-authored-by: Brooks <brooks@prumo.org>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Some grammar nits, but overall looks good.
Co-authored-by: Brooks <brooks@prumo.org>
Co-authored-by: Brooks <brooks@prumo.org>
@jacobcreech We have received approval for this SIMD from FD and Anza. Do you mind merging it? |
Seem this SIMD reaches consensus. All please take a final check,. Will merge if no objections commented by May 14. Thanks for great collaboration! |
Add simd for disable rent fees collection.