Ok, then why would SNO want L2->L2 payout if the withdrawal fees are higher than L1 transfer fee?
you not got the point, @hoarder speak about transfer on L1>L1 in batch mode.
now you make 1 trasfer to 1 addres.
@hoarder try to tell you that there is posibility make many transfer to different addresses and ammount in 1 transfer. that will make about 50% chiper than make transfers one by one.
and this is all i L1 level without L2 level
@hoarder am i wrong in something?
I am not saying it is most expensive. I can come up with other solutions that would be even more expensive. The issue is L1->L1 is cheaper then L2->L1 so it makes no sense to use that.
- L2->L1 fees can be paid in STORJ. You wouldn’t have to send ETH first.
.2 L2->L2 is the cheaper. I haven’t moved my STORJ payout for a long time now. I will call withdraw maybe once per year which makes it significant cheaper over L1->L1 transfers every month.
after a year it can worth nothing, depending on etherium price
Most expensive out of all three.
But anyway, my suggestion to use L2->L1 and benefit from batched payouts being cheaper relied on what Alexey said. If it’s not true then the suggestion makes no sense indeed.
Who would have thought that ten transactions are significantly more expensive than one. I never paid more than a couple of $ to move storj tokens, but if L2->L1 costs $10 just like it shows up in explorer, half of the savings are consumed by that withdrawal making it undesirable.
I have mentioned the other thread several times. You don’t need to guess the transaction fee for the withdraw. You can test exactly that. The result for me would have been a fee of 16 STORJ.
Hi,
I have taken my time to understand what is zksync. It seems really good, and we need a strong adoption of this kind of solution into the whole ETH ecosystem to be usefull for all SNO. I mean that at this time you get your storj with zksync, you can move it with very low fees between some wallet address using L2. But you can’t expect more.
If you would like to put your storj, for example, in an centralized exchange or a defi exchange, you must withdraw from L2->L1in your wallet. There are two main disadvantages :
- You have to pay twice the fees to move your tokens. First to L2->L1 and second to exchange.
- Even you do not need ETH, a small SNO like me who is getting 15 storj per month as average, will pay 16-17 storj per withdrawal
Another point is the price of ETH. More it grows, more we will pay in storj fees.
I will suggest an idea to help small SNO and I think also the others. With 15 storj/month I can wait to the minimum threshold of 25% and do not double my fees to do what I want with my storj. As I stated, I am really enthusiastic about L2 solution, so storj could give a bonus to SNO who are opt-in to L2 solution based on this 25% of threshold. Every month I will receive my ~15 storj and based on 16/17 storj of fees to withdraw, I will receive this bonus amount the 5th month. For SNO who reach or exceeds the minimum threshold each month, this bonus could be per quarter (I think out loud 
)
This solution could sound useless for storjlabs or small SNO. Storjlabs will not reduce fees as if all SNO are going to zksync. But with this issue with L2->L1 for SNO, I think adoption will not be strong. With a strong adoption of zksync solution by storjlabs and SNO, it will be a strong signal to others players to implement gateway with their services. So we will all win, storjlabs could remove bonuses and SNO will get their storj each month (or even more quickly) and do what they want.
It is just an idea and not an ultimate solution. I expect opening a useful discussion about this topic because I am just a small SNO and I don’t represent others SNO or people working in storjlabs.
1 Like
You can withdraw to an exchange in one transaction. You don’t need a second transaction.
Currently it is not possible to pay the transaction fee with STORJ in mainnet. It is simply disabled. zkSync will enable it when the STORJ market volume is high enough. I expect the gas price to increase as well which means whatever number they would tell us now will most likely increase as we would try to reach it. I am not willing to start this race in the first place and better calculate with additional ETH deposit costs.
Another possible solution might be loopring. That is the exact same solution (zkrollup). Unfortunately, I wan’t able to find a testnet.
Is this it ?
Not necessary that one repository but it belongs to the loopring project so yes.
1 Like
I totally miss that point, thank you. Even if I have been reading a lot, like your testing, I didn’t catch this transaction test.
But I am still not sure if it is possible to do some swapping or pooling to uniswap from tokens in L2 wallet in just one transaction. Do you think it is possible ?
I was wrong with zksync possibilities, so I think I am wrong with loopring. The main issue is you can’t even swap/pool your storj tokens with loopring. I had also looked into deversifi.com, same issue.
I never used uniswap so I have no idea.
Since you know more about uniswap than me I would assume this is correct and also applies on zkSync. At the end they all have a similar withdraw funktion.
One addition. Loopring has a connected exchange. So in theory it should be possible to receive L2 payout, L2 deposit on the exchange, L2 trades. Ofc you would still have to withdraw to L1 out of the exchange at some point. Compared to uniswap the loopring exchange should be cheaper to use? I haven’t used any decentralized exchange so far. My last experience was over a year ago.
I tested Loopring a bit, if you setup a loopring wallet you can trade with their exchange out of your wallet L2 balance, no need to deposit anywhere. I think exchange fee was ~0.25%.
The downside is that the exchange has a limited set of trading pairs and has no pairs for storj token yet. Also liquidity might be an issue.
3 Likes
Ha, missed the poll. I would have voted L2. And Loopring not zkSync if I had a choice.
You can withdraw to a different wallet (include exchange deposit too):
Thank you Alexey. Littleskunk also told me that and I found that I miss that transaction in the testing.
It’s really complicated to understand all consequences to use L2 protocol. But deposit and withdrawal from/to L1 are more expensive than sending L1->L1.
For example if I would like to deposit all my ETH 0.015 from mainnet to zksync, at this date mar. 02 févr. 2021 11:23:07 UTC it costs 0.0212 ETH (30$ !) in Gas Fee. So I think withdrawal will be the same price and it will be the same price for the Test final L1 address. So moving my funds to an exchange is expensive.
Compared to send my ETH or Storj in another wallet address, at the same date, fees are between 5$ (slow) or 10$ (fast).
I don’t know exactly how it works with uniswap or loopring. For now I can swap my tokens with 0,3% of fees with uniswap on mainnet, just connecting my wallet. So if having tokens in L2 protocol is also doing a withdrawal in the same transaction, it costs too much.
Again L2 is looking promising, and I will keep me up to date with this. But actual fees do not help mass adoption, and with the increase of ETH price, it will be more expensive. So I will certainly wait for the minimum threshold, because moving my funds after will be less expensive and it will not block me.