Skip to main content
Log in

A study on gas cost of ethereum smart contracts and performance of blockchain on simulation tool

  • Published:
Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Blockchain technology has become a popular platform for conducting secure and decentralised transactions. Performance analysis of Ethereum smart contracts is critical to understanding their limitations and potential for various applications. This study aimed to evaluate the gas cost of different search algorithms and the impact of block size on the throughput of the Ethereum network. Additionally, Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Dogecoin simulations were conducted to analyse the impact of various configurations in the block interval and block propagation on the number of transaction outputs. The results showed that the gas cost of search algorithms varied significantly, with the quick search having a lower cost. Furthermore, increasing the block size had a positive impact on the throughput of the Ethereum network, allowing more transactions to be processed per second. The simulation results revealed that the block interval and block propagation significantly affected the number of transaction outputs, highlighting the importance of optimising these configurations for blockchain-based systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Listing 1
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Listing 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availibility

The results/data/figures in this manuscript have not been published elsewhere, nor are they under consideration (from you or one of your contributing authors) by another publisher..

Notes

  1. https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/feature/A-timeline-and-history-of-blockchain-technology Date accessed: 2023-01-07

  2. https://towardsdatascience.com/the-blockchain-scalability-problem-the-race-for-visa-like-transaction-speed-5cce48f9d44 [Accessed: 2023-01-07]

  3. https://www.bitstamp.net/learn/crypto-101/what-is-block-size/ [Accessed: 2023-01-07]

  4. https://docs.soliditylang.org/en/v0.8.17/080-breaking-changes.html [Accessed: 2023-01-07]

  5. https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/blocks/block-size [Accessed: 2023-01-07]

  6. https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-4488 [Accessed: 2023-01-07]

References

  1. Ducrée J (2022) Satoshi nakamoto and the origins of bitcoin–narratio in nomine, datis et numeris. arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.10257

  2. Javaid M, Haleem A, Singh RP, Suman R, Khan S (2022) A review of blockchain technology applications for financial services. BenchCouncil Transactions on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluations 2(3):100073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbench.2022.100073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Azbeg K, Ouchetto O, Andaloussi SJ, Fetjah L (2022) A taxonomic review of the use of iot and blockchain in healthcare applications. IRBM 43(5):511–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irbm.2021.05.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Jamil F, Qayyum F, Alhelaly S, Javed F, Muthanna A (2021) Intelligent microservice based on blockchain for healthcare applications. Comput Mater Contin 69(2)

  5. Tai LD, Thanh NV, Thanh TM (2022) Blockmarking: Hybrid model of blockchain and watermarking technique for copyright protection. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on Information and Communication Technology. SoICT ’22, pp. 398–404. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3568562.3568575

  6. Ahl A, Goto M, Yarime M, Tanaka K, Sagawa D (2022) Challenges and opportunities of blockchain energy applications: Interrelatedness among technological, economic, social, environmental, and institutional dimensions. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 166:112623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Pournader M, Shi Y, Seuring S, Koh SL (2020) Blockchain applications in supply chains, transport and logistics: a systematic review of the literature. Int J Prod Res 58(7):2063–2081

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kushwaha SS, Joshi S, Singh D, Kaur M, Lee H-N (2022) Systematic review of security vulnerabilities in ethereum blockchain smart contract. IEEE Access 10:6605–6621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Zheng G, Gao L, Huang L, Guan J (2021) Ethereum Smart Contract Development in Solidity. Springer, ???. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6218-1

  10. Khan MMA, Sarwar HMA, Awais M (2022) Gas consumption analysis of ethereum blockchain transactions. Concurr Comput Pract Exp 34(4):6679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Werner SM, Pritz PJ, Perez D (2020) Step on the gas? a better approach for recommending the ethereum gas price. In: Mathematical Research for Blockchain Economy: 2nd International Conference MARBLE 2020, Vilamoura, Portugal, pp 161–177. Springer

  12. Wood G et al (2014) Ethereum: A secure decentralised generalised transaction ledger. Ethereum Project Yellow Paper 151(2014):1–32

    Google Scholar 

  13. Li C (2021) Gas estimation and optimization for smart contracts on ethereum. In: 2021 36th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), pp 1082–1086. https://doi.org/10.1109/ASE51524.2021.9678932

  14. Albert E, Correas J, Gordillo P, Román-Díez G, Rubio A (2020) Gasol: Gas analysis and optimization for ethereum smart contracts. In: International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems, pp 118–125. Springer

  15. Fan C, Ghaemi S, Khazaei H, Musilek P (2020) Performance evaluation of blockchain systems: A systematic survey. IEEE Access 8:126927–126950

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dinh TTA, Wang J, Chen G, Liu R, Ooi BC, Tan K-L (2017) Blockbench: A framework for analyzing private blockchains. In: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Conference on Management of Data, pp 1085–1100

  17. Choi W, Hong JW-K (2021) Performance evaluation of ethereum private and testnet networks using hyperledger caliper. In: 2021 22nd Asia-Pacific Network Operations and Management Symposium (APNOMS), pp 325–329. IEEE

  18. Saingre D, Ledoux T, Menaud J-M (2020) Bctmark: a framework for benchmarking blockchain technologies. In: 2020 IEEE/ACS 17th International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications (AICCSA), pp 1–8. IEEE

  19. Dong Z, Zheng E, Choon Y, Zomaya AY (2019) Dagbench: A performance evaluation framework for dag distributed ledgers. In: 2019 IEEE 12th International Conference on Cloud Computing (CLOUD), pp 264–271. IEEE

  20. Alharby M, Van Moorsel A (2019) Blocksim: a simulation framework for blockchain systems. ACM SIGMETRICS Perform Eval Rev 46(3):135–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Pandey S, Ojha G, Shrestha B, Kumar R (2019) Blocksim: A practical simulation tool for optimal network design, stability and planning. In: 2019 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain and Cryptocurrency (ICBC), pp 133–137. IEEE

  22. Ruan P, Dinh TTA, Loghin D, Zhang M, Chen G, Lin Q, Ooi BC (2021) Blockchains vs. distributed databases: Dichotomy and fusion. In: Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Management of Data, pp 1504–1517

  23. Gervais A, Karame GO, Wüst K, Glykantzis V, Ritzdorf H, Capkun S (2016) On the security and performance of proof of work blockchains. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp 3–16

Download references

Funding

No Funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Thanh T.M and Quyet D.T wrote the main manuscript and prepared tables and figures. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Minh Thanh Ta.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

This research did not contain any studies involving animal or human participants, nor did it take place in any private or protected areas.

Consent to publish

I have read the Springer journal policies on author responsibilities and submitted this manuscript in accordance with those policies.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection: Special Issue on 2 - Track on Security and Privacy

Guest Editors: Rongxing Lu

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ta, M.T., Do, T.Q. A study on gas cost of ethereum smart contracts and performance of blockchain on simulation tool. Peer-to-Peer Netw. Appl. 17, 200–212 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-023-01598-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-023-01598-3

Keywords

Navigation