Storage Limit issues

[forgetso]

This node seems to not work with the recent changes surrounding storage limits.

When uploading contracts the following error is received:

contracts.StorageDepositLimitExhausted(More storage was created than allowed by the storage deposit limit.)

A normal substrate node started with cargo run --release -- --dev --tmp -lerror,runtime::contracts=debug works using the same configuration of polkadotjs and deploy script.

I have even upgraded the substrate contracts node to a recent substrate commit to see if that was the issue but it still fails on deployment.

https://github.com/prosopo-io/substrate-contracts-node/tree/storage_deposit_limit (Synced to paritytech/substrate@7409589)

I can create a PR for this if you like.

polkadot-js versions:

    "@polkadot/api": "7.2.1",
    "@polkadot/api-contract": "7.2.1",
    "@polkadot/types": "7.2.1",
    "@polkadot/keyring": "8.2.2",
    "@polkadot/util": "8.2.2",
    "@polkadot/wasm-crypto": "4.5.1",
    "@polkadot/util-crypto": "8.2.2",

[forgetso]

The issue seems to be the inconsistent default values assigned to Alice in the substrate-contracts-node versus substrate.

• In substrate the accounts are seeded with 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.
• In substrate-contracts-node the accounts are seeded with 1,152,921,504,606,846,976 (1<<60).

Both scripts use the same deploy script which passes a value of 20000 UNIT to the contract.

The substrate deploy succeeds whereas the substrate-contracts-node fails with contracts.StorageDepositLimitExhausted.

It doesn't seem to make any difference as I increase the sent value. It always fails with the same error. The highest value I tried was 2000000000000000 UNIT

To reproduce, you can clone our smart contract repo and run the deploy script with substrate-contracts-node built with default values of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 and 1,152,921,504,606,846,976.

git clone https://github.com/prosopo-io/protocol \
&& cd protocol \
&& yarn \
&& yarn build \
&& yarn redspot run scripts/deploy.ts

You can either use latest contracts node (1ab14fe) or clone the forked node which is updated to paritytech/substrate@7409589. The error appears on both.

git clone https://github.com/paritytech/substrate-contracts-node/ \
&& cd substrate-contracts-node \
&& cargo build --release

However, there is a caveat that we are using a slightly modified version of ink that allows for SpreadAllocate on enum. The contract will not build without this.

[athei]

Does the error also happen with the unmodified substrate node (the man if you just use cargo run in the substrate repo)?

[forgetso]

The error does not happen with the unmodified substrate repo. I've outlined what I've tested below.

Package	Balance	Result
substrate	1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000	succeeds
substrate	1<<60	???
substrate contracts node	1<<60	fails
substrate contracts node	1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000	succeeds

Clearly this could be further narrowed down by checking substrate with the initial balances as 1<<60. I've not had time to check this out as currently trying to finish up work for a Web3 milestone.

[forgetso]

I thought I'd solved this by using the substrate node but it seems I get the same error after running a few contract functions, eventually hitting the limit. I added some debug to substrate to see what's going on when storage deposit limit is specified as null in redspot / polkadotjs.

2022-01-10 21:05:18
Storage Deposit Limit 123576914103721

2022-01-10 21:05:18
Storage Amount Required 411000000000000

I'm not sure what the number 123576914103721 is. It doesn't appear to be the max of u64 or similar, and I don't know where it's being set. But it's lower than the required storage amount for my function (4.11e15), which is an issue.

If I manually set the storage_deposit_limit to anything larger than ~9e15 I get an error in polkadotjs, preventing me from setting a large enough limit.

Error: createType(Call):: Call: failed decoding balances.transfer:: Struct: failed on args: {"dest":"MultiAddress","value":"Compact<u128>"}:: Struct: failed on value: Compact<u128>:: Assertion failed

TLDR: it could be an issue with the API and not the substrate contracts node.

[forgetso]

The confusion was caused by the differing initial balances for Alice etc. After this was taken into consideration, it turns out I can send a large enough initial deposit to my account by passing the number through BN, getting around the StorageDepositLimitExhausted.

e.g. send a large initial deposit to my testing account
new BN("100000000000000000") // it's important that a string is passed