1

Is it safe to assume that chainlink oracles have an upper bound on the price feed, eg it fits into uint96, or perhaps a smaller or larger number? It would be great to know the absolute largest number that a chainlink oracle price feed could provide, and potential escaping mechanisms in case this price is exceeded.

Thanks a lot for helping!

4
  • 1
    Hey Pete, welcome to StackExchange! It is easier for us to answer your questions if you post them separately. – Paul Razvan Berg Jan 23 at 9:37
  • Also as a side note, this may answer your first question: Do all Chainlink feeds return prices with 8 decimals of precision? – Paul Razvan Berg Jan 23 at 9:37
  • @Pete, I edited your question so that it's just one. As Paul wrote, the other answer is there. – Patrick Collins Jan 23 at 17:04
  • I realize now that my question was poorly phrased, because I was looking for a practical upper bound. The largest chainlink price feed number on the Kovan testnet consists of 66 bits, so we have decided to go for a uint88 to accommodate for a factor four million prince increase. – Pete L. Jan 29 at 8:08
1

The largest number can be a number that fits into an int256

More info:

Chainlink price feeds can be implemented whatever way works in the future, right now they use an int256 since it should cover most use cases, and should be big enough. In the event, a bigger number was needed (which would be a HUGE number), a different price feed would likely be deployed with a solution to that problem.

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.