0

I want to simulate sending multiple transactions at the same time to a smart contract and i'm wondering if, for example, sending 100 transactions from one address is the same as sending 1 transaction from 100 addresses in terms of the chance the transaction getting mined and time it would take.

I know that using only one address, the nonce will determine the order in which the transactions need to be mined. But they would all be in the transaction pool at the same time just as those singular transactions from the 100 addresses would?

Improve this question
1

The more realistic situation will be to send from 100 different addresses.

From an ethereum client perspective there is some difference but not much.

For a miner it should not matter. Once the proposed block is created by the client the proof of work algorithm execution will be the same.

Improve this answer
3
  • So if i'd like to test how long it takes for my contract to handle 100 requests i could send 100 requests to it from one address as opposed to actually sending a request from 100 different addresses and i'd get pretty much similar results even though as you say actually using 100 addresses are more realistic? The reason I ask is because it seems like a real hassle funding 100 addresses with test eth. – Conviley Mar 30 '20 at 14:37
  • @Conviley Making 100 transfers is not difficult at all, unless you are testing in a public testnet or mainnet. – Ismael Mar 30 '20 at 15:04
  • yeah that's exactly what i'd like to do! But I'm deliberating 1 address 100 transactions on Ropsten OR 100 addresses 1 transaction and using ganache, simulating a blockchain and setting blocktime to mimic that of either a testnet or mainnet(this would solve the funding of accounts). – Conviley Mar 30 '20 at 15:12

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.