TL;DR
- Ethereum Upgrade: Two developers submitted competing proposals aimed at preventing existing smart contracts from breaking if Glamsterdam introduces major gas cost increases for contract creation and stored data operations.
- Ethereum Risk: Researchers warned that hundreds of thousands of contracts could be affected because many applications were built assuming gas costs would remain unchanged, and some cannot be updated after deployment.
- Ethereum Proposals: One draft keeps older contracts on the current gas schedule, while the other applies new pricing for transaction fees but allows contracts to execute under the previous rules.
Ethereum is approaching its next major software upgrade, but concerns over compatibility risks have prompted two developers to propose emergency solutions designed to protect funds already locked in live applications. The debate centers on changes included in the upcoming Glamsterdam upgrade, which could alter how gas costs are calculated for certain smart contract operations.
According to the draft plans, proposals EIP-8037 and EIP-8038 would significantly increase the gas charged for creating contracts and interacting with stored data. Gas serves as the pricing mechanism for actions performed by smart contracts. Under the proposed changes, creating contracts on Ethereum would become far more expensive, with the base cost rising from 32,000 gas to 183,600 gas before additional expenses are applied.
Upgrade Concerns Reach Testing Stage
Many Ethereum applications were built with the expectation that these costs would remain stable. Some contracts are programmed to pay fixed gas amounts when interacting with other applications, meaning higher costs could cause those transactions to fail. In many cases, the affected contracts cannot be modified once deployed. The issue has already disrupted testing plans.
Security researchers raised concerns that the proposed gas repricing could impact a large number of existing contracts, prompting the postponement of a planned Glamsterdam rehearsal. Concerns about Ethereum compatibility intensified after researcher pcaversaccio argued that the upgrade should not move forward in its current form. Developer banteg also claimed that previous estimates may have overlooked additional affected contracts, including major protocols.
Competing Solutions Offer Different Paths
Leo Glisic’s proposal would create separate rules for old and new contracts. Existing applications would continue operating under current gas schedules, while new Ethereum contracts would follow the updated pricing model. Giulio Rebuffo proposed a different approach. His draft uses two accounting systems for every Ethereum transaction, allowing contract execution to follow older rules while transaction billing adopts the new schedule.
However, the proposal notes that no implementation or consensus testing has yet been completed. Both drafts remain early-stage proposals without target deployment dates. The discussion is expected to continue before Ethereum developers proceed with further testing, leaving the final direction uncertain. For now, both plans share the same objective: reducing risks for existing applications and preserving a smoother path for Ethereum users.