The debate over increasing Ethereum’s block capacity has reignited, with core developer Marius Van Der Wijden offering a cautionary perspective on Vitalik Buterin’s recent proposal to raise the network’s gas limit. While the idea of boosting throughput is tempting, Van Der Wijden emphasizes that such a change carries significant technical and systemic risks. A measured, long-term approach—especially one that waits for key upgrades like EIP-4844—is essential to preserve Ethereum’s decentralization, security, and sustainability.
Vitalik Proposes Increasing Block Capacity
Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin suggested raising the current gas limit from 3 million to 4 million, a 33% increase, during an Ethereum Foundation AMA on Reddit. The goal? To enhance network throughput and accommodate growing transaction demand.
Buterin noted that Ethereum hasn’t adjusted this parameter in over three years, implying that a modest increase might be both reasonable and overdue. However, while the intention is sound, the implications are far more complex than they appear on the surface.
👉 Discover how blockchain scalability impacts real-world adoption and what’s next for Ethereum.
Understanding the Basics: Gas Limit and Node Data
Before diving into the risks, it's crucial to understand two foundational concepts: gas limit and node data storage.
What Is Gas Limit?
The gas limit defines the maximum amount of computational work a block can include. Increasing it allows more transactions or more complex smart contract executions per block—effectively expanding block space.
Historically, Ethereum’s gas limit has gradually increased in response to demand. On-chain data shows that blocks are consistently filled close to capacity, indicating strong market utilization.
However, more gas per block doesn’t just mean higher throughput—it also means more data processed, stored, and verified by every node in the network.
Two Types of Node Data: State vs. History
Nodes maintain two critical types of data:
- State Data: The current snapshot of the network—account balances, contract storage, token holdings. This data is actively accessed during transaction execution and is vital for consensus.
- History Data: The complete record of past transactions and block headers. While not constantly used, it ensures auditability and long-term security.
While both types grow over time, state data poses a greater challenge because it cannot be pruned or expired easily—unlike history data, which can be managed through future upgrades.
Risks of Increasing the Gas Limit
1. State Data Bloat and Performance Degradation
As of block height 18,418,786 (October 2023), Ethereum’s state size was approximately 87 GB, up from 80 GB just four months earlier—an average growth of 2 GB per month. At this rate, state size could reach 111 GB in one year and 207 GB in five years.
But storage isn’t the main issue—it’s access speed. Every time the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) processes a transaction, it reads and modifies state data. Larger state sizes mean slower disk I/O, longer verification times, and higher hardware requirements.
Moreover, Ethereum clients like Geth store state in complex structures like Merkle Patricia Tries for cryptographic verification. At the same block height, Geth’s total disk usage for state-related data was around 180 GB, bringing the full node requirement to roughly 267 GB.
Increasing the gas limit would accelerate this growth, making it harder for average users to run nodes—threatening decentralization.
2. History Data Growth Accelerates
History data is also expanding rapidly. A full Geth node required about 350 GB in early 2021; by 2024, that had ballooned to over 900 GB. Transaction count has more than doubled—from 980 million to over 2.2 billion.
With the rise of Layer 2 rollups, which store transaction data as calldata, history growth has accelerated further. Between April and October 2023, calldata size increased from 339 GB to 427 GB—a 9 GB monthly increase.
While solutions like EIP-4844 aim to reduce this burden by introducing short-lived blobs for L2 data, deploying these upgrades before increasing gas limits is critical.
👉 Learn how Layer 2 solutions are reshaping Ethereum’s scalability roadmap.
3. Longer Node Synchronization Times
Higher gas limits directly impact node synchronization:
- Full syncs take longer, especially for new nodes joining the network.
- Historical data downloads grow larger.
- State snapshots require more bandwidth and time.
- Snap healing (repairing incomplete state during sync) slows down due to increased data churn.
- Catch-up performance degrades as nodes process more changes per block.
These delays discourage new node operators and increase reliance on centralized infrastructure providers.
4. Reduced Client Diversity
Developing new execution clients (e.g., in Python or JavaScript) is already challenging. Higher gas limits raise the performance bar, making it harder for alternative clients to keep up.
We’ve already seen this with the integration of KZG commitments, where most clients rely on C-KZG (a C-based library) for performance—abandoning native implementations. This trend risks pushing client development toward a single language or optimization path, reducing diversity and increasing centralization risk.
5. Worst-Case Scenario Vulnerabilities
It’s not enough to plan for normal conditions. What happens during a sudden surge—say, five consecutive blocks at double capacity?
Such spikes could overwhelm low-end nodes by exhausting:
- Disk I/O
- CPU
- Memory
Post-merge, many users run both consensus and execution clients on the same machine. Overloading one could destabilize the other—creating cascading failures.
Additionally, larger state changes increase proof sizes for light clients. While not critical today, this could hinder future innovations like cross-client verification on mobile devices.
Are There Solutions?
Technology Is Evolving—But Not Fast Enough
Ethereum has overcome scaling challenges before:
- Snapshot sync drastically reduced initial sync time.
- PBSS improved database layout and pruning.
- Txpool optimizations enhanced high-load resilience.
- MEV-Boost externalized builder responsibilities.
- L2 offloading reduced mainnet congestion.
Yet, one major issue remains unsolved: state bloat. There’s still no practical way to prune or reset state without compromising security or continuity.
While EIP-4444 proposes expiring historical data after one year—a short-term fix for history growth—no equivalent exists for state data. Researchers are encouraged to contribute to this critical area.
Wait for EIP-4844 Before Any Gas Limit Increase
Currently, EIP-4844 (Proto-Danksharding) is being tested on testnets. It introduces blob-carrying transactions that reduce L2 data costs and slow historical growth.
Given that this upgrade will already increase node storage and I/O demands, raising the gas limit before its deployment would compound stress on the network. The safest path is to:
- Deploy EIP-4844 on mainnet.
- Monitor its impact.
- Reassess gas limit adjustments only afterward.
Additionally, once blobs are live, calldata pricing should be reviewed. If it remains underpriced, it could lead to spam—pushing L2s to adopt blobspace efficiently.
Gas Limit: A Parameter That Demands Respect
In summary, the gas limit is not a dial to be turned up casually. It affects:
- Node operability
- Decentralization
- Security
- Client diversity
- Long-term sustainability
Any change must consider both immediate effects and long-term consequences. As Van Der Wijden argues, patience and technical maturity should guide this decision—not short-term throughput gains.
👉 Stay ahead of Ethereum’s next upgrades and understand their real-world impact.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q: Why not just increase hardware requirements instead of limiting gas?
A: Raising hardware demands centralizes node operation. Ethereum’s strength lies in allowing ordinary users to run nodes—preserving censorship resistance and trustlessness.
Q: Can’t we just delete old state data like history?
A: Unlike history, state data represents current ownership and contract status. Deleting it would break consensus and invalidate balances—making safe pruning extremely difficult.
Q: How does EIP-4844 help with gas limit concerns?
A: By offloading L2 data to temporary blobs, EIP-4844 reduces pressure on historical storage. This makes future gas increases safer by mitigating one major growth vector.
Q: Is there a safe threshold for gas limit increases?
A: There’s no fixed number. The limit must balance throughput with node health. Gradual increases, post-upgrade evaluations, and real-world testing are essential.
Q: Could rollups make gas limit increases unnecessary?
A: Rollups already handle most scaling needs. Improving L2 efficiency may offer better ROI than pushing mainnet limits—preserving Ethereum as a secure settlement layer.
Cryptocurrency investments are highly volatile and may result in partial or total loss of capital. Always conduct thorough research and assess your risk tolerance.