Deploying factory contract which deploys ERC721 & ERC20 exceeds block gas limit

Serenity · October 23, 2020, 2:56am

I have a main contract to help me deploy ERC721 && ERC20 token

but it seems to have some problems when i tried deploy both ERC20 and ERC721 in a same factory contract.

i use @openzeppelin/contracts": "^2.5.1" in package.json

My ERC721 contract

pragma solidity ^0.5.0;

import "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC721/ERC721Full.sol";
import "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC721/ERC721Mintable.sol";
import "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC721/ERC721MetadataMintable.sol";
import "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC721/ERC721Holder.sol";
import "@openzeppelin/contracts/drafts/Counters.sol";

contract myERC721 is
    ERC721Full,
    ERC721Mintable,
    ERC721MetadataMintable,
    ERC721Holder
{
    using Counters for Counters.Counter;
    Counters.Counter private _tokenIds;

    event awardNewItem(uint256 indexed newID);

    constructor(
        string memory name,
        string memory symbol,
        string memory baseURI 
    ) public ERC721Full(name, symbol) {
        _setBaseURI(baseURI);
    }

    function awardItem(
        address player,
        string memory _tokenURI
    ) public returns (uint256) {
        _tokenIds.increment();

        uint256 newItemId = _tokenIds.current();
        mint(player, newItemId);
        _setTokenURI(newItemId, _tokenURI);

        return newItemId;
    }
}

My ERC20 contract

pragma solidity ^0.5.0;

import "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/ERC20.sol";
import "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/ERC20Detailed.sol";
import "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/ERC20Burnable.sol";
import "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/ERC20Mintable.sol";

contract myERC20 is ERC20, ERC20Detailed, ERC20Burnable, ERC20Mintable {
    constructor(
        string memory name, 
        string memory symbol,
        uint8 decimals, 
        uint256 initialSupply
    ) public ERC20Detailed(name, symbol, decimals) {
        _mint(msg.sender, initialSupply * (10**uint256(decimals)));
    }
}

My main factory contract

pragma solidity ^0.5.0;

import "./myERC721.sol";
import "./myERC20.sol";

contract tokenFactory {

    address[] tokenAddress;
 
    function deploy721Contract(
        string calldata name,
        string calldata symbol,
        string calldata baseUrl
    ) external returns (myERC721 cardAddress) {

        myERC721 newCards = new myERC721(name, symbol, baseUrl);

        tokenAddress.push(address(newCards));
        return newCards;
    }

    function deploy20Contract(
        string calldata name,
        string calldata symbol,
        uint8 decimals,
        uint256 initialSupply
    ) external returns (myERC20 creditsAddress) {

        myERC20 newCredits = new myERC20(
            name,
            symbol,
            decimals,
            initialSupply
        );

        tokenAddress.push(address(newCredits));
        return newCredits;
    }

}

Problem

when i comment out the deploy20Contract function code. the factory contract can deploy and use 3598155 gas
when i comment out deploy721Contract function code. the factory contract can deploy and use 2208084 gas

BOTH 1 and 2 do not have cost much gas.

when i don’t comment out any code, both have the deploy20Contract and deploy721Contract in the factory contract

it will get out of gas. and i increase the gasLimit. it still out of gas and finally tell me Exceeds block gas limit

It seems that when i depoy both ERC20 && ERC721 contract in the same contrat. it will stuck in an endless loop and use unlimited gas.

how should i do? Is there any conflict about importing the 721 & 20 contract at the same contract？

abcoathup · October 26, 2020, 9:21am

Hi @Serenity,

Welcome to the community forum

The tokenFactory contract is failing to deploy as it is over the bytecode size limit of 24577 or greater (https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/blob/master/EIPS/eip-170.md)

With optimization disabled the bytecode size is as follows:

$ jq '.deployedBytecode | length / 2 - 1' build/contracts/tokenFactory.json
26394

With optimization enabled, 200 runs the bytecode size is reduced and can be deployed:

$ jq '.deployedBytecode | length / 2 - 1' build/contracts/tokenFactory.json
17403

When you change the optimization settings, we need to rebuild (either remove the build directory or use npx truffle compile --all)

You are currently using OpenZeppelin Contracts 2.x. You may want to look at using OpenZeppelin Contracts 3.x.

Assuming that you are deploying multiple ERC20 tokens and ERC721 tokens, I would suggest looking at deploying an implementation contract for each and then deploy minimal proxies: https://blog.openzeppelin.com/deep-dive-into-the-minimal-proxy-contract/

This would reduce the amount of gas required to create new tokens.

Serenity · October 26, 2020, 9:28am

but why still i can’t deploy it after i enabled optimization in remix?

abcoathup · October 27, 2020, 1:38am

Hi @Serenity,

I deployed in Remix to Ropsten with optimization enabled and was then able to use the factory to create an ERC20 and an ERC721

I converted your contracts to use GitHub imports so I could deploy using Remix.

myERC721.sol

pragma solidity ^0.5.0;

import "https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/blob/v2.5.1/contracts/token/ERC721/ERC721Full.sol";
import "https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/blob/v2.5.1/contracts/token/ERC721/ERC721Mintable.sol";
import "https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/blob/v2.5.1/contracts/token/ERC721/ERC721MetadataMintable.sol";
import "https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/blob/v2.5.1/contracts/token/ERC721/ERC721Holder.sol";
import "https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/blob/v2.5.1/contracts/drafts/Counters.sol";

contract myERC721 is
    ERC721Full,
    ERC721Mintable,
    ERC721MetadataMintable,
    ERC721Holder
{
    using Counters for Counters.Counter;
    Counters.Counter private _tokenIds;

    event awardNewItem(uint256 indexed newID);

    constructor(
        string memory name,
        string memory symbol,
        string memory baseURI 
    ) public ERC721Full(name, symbol) {
        _setBaseURI(baseURI);
    }

    function awardItem(
        address player,
        string memory _tokenURI
    ) public returns (uint256) {
        _tokenIds.increment();

        uint256 newItemId = _tokenIds.current();
        mint(player, newItemId);
        _setTokenURI(newItemId, _tokenURI);

        return newItemId;
    }
}

myERC20.sol

pragma solidity ^0.5.0;

import "https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/blob/v2.5.1/contracts/token/ERC20/ERC20.sol";
import "https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/blob/v2.5.1/contracts/token/ERC20/ERC20Detailed.sol";
import "https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/blob/v2.5.1/contracts/token/ERC20/ERC20Burnable.sol";
import "https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/blob/v2.5.1/contracts/token/ERC20/ERC20Mintable.sol";

contract myERC20 is ERC20, ERC20Detailed, ERC20Burnable, ERC20Mintable {
    constructor(
        string memory name, 
        string memory symbol,
        uint8 decimals, 
        uint256 initialSupply
    ) public ERC20Detailed(name, symbol, decimals) {
        _mint(msg.sender, initialSupply * (10**uint256(decimals)));
    }
}

tokenFactory.sol

pragma solidity ^0.5.0;

import "./myERC721.sol";
import "./myERC20.sol";

contract tokenFactory {

    address[] tokenAddress;
 
    function deploy721Contract(
        string calldata name,
        string calldata symbol,
        string calldata baseUrl
    ) external returns (myERC721 cardAddress) {

        myERC721 newCards = new myERC721(name, symbol, baseUrl);

        tokenAddress.push(address(newCards));
        return newCards;
    }

    function deploy20Contract(
        string calldata name,
        string calldata symbol,
        uint8 decimals,
        uint256 initialSupply
    ) external returns (myERC20 creditsAddress) {

        myERC20 newCredits = new myERC20(
            name,
            symbol,
            decimals,
            initialSupply
        );

        tokenAddress.push(address(newCredits));
        return newCredits;
    }

}

abcoathup · November 1, 2020, 10:44pm

Hi @Serenity,

I wanted to check that you were able to deploy with optimization?

DeveloperMarwan · February 14, 2022, 9:15pm

Hi @abcoathup , I have a question regarding the use of the minimal proxies for the ERC20 tokens. You suggested deploying an implementation contract for the ERC20 token then deploying minimal proxies. Looking at the the "Clones" contract the clone() method only takes an implementation address. I do not see how we can pass arguments to clone. The reason I am asking is that if we are using the minimal proxy as a factory for the ERC20 tokens, how can we specify a different token id, name? or are stuck with the same token id and name for all?

Thanks.

Topic		Replies	Views
Error: StandaloneERC20 Factory SDK	19	4451	November 13, 2019
Creating a contract from my contract costing 4.5 - 5 million gas Contracts	11	1463	September 23, 2019
Request for ERC721 token Contracts erc721	16	6170	July 29, 2020
Ethereum for Web Developers Book - ERC721 sample app - Error when running deploy.js Support erc721	7	1240	September 28, 2020
Leveraging OpenZeppelin with Sound and Gigantic Steps Contracts erc20 , erc721	30	2731	March 2, 2019

Deploying factory contract which deploys ERC721 & ERC20 exceeds block gas limit

My ERC721 contract

My ERC20 contract

My main factory contract

Problem

myERC721.sol

myERC20.sol

tokenFactory.sol

Related topics