# Next revision of increasing nomination pool limits
**URL:** https://forum.polkadot.network/t/next-revision-of-increasing-nomination-pool-limits/2498
**Category:** Miscellaneous
**Tags:** staking
**Created:** [April 3, 2023, 7:38am UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/next-revision-of-increasing-nomination-pool-limits/2498 "2023-04-03T07:38:23Z")
**Posts on this page:** 12
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@ross](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/ross)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2023, 7:38am UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/next-revision-of-increasing-nomination-pool-limits/2498/1 "2023-04-03T07:38:23Z")
The ultimate goal of nomination pools is to lift limits of pool members and number of pools on the network. To that end, I’m proposing the following limit increases:
#### Polkadot
- `maxPools`: 256 → 2,048
- `maxPoolMembers`: 16,384 → `None`
- `maxPoolMembersPerPool`: `None` → `None` (not changed)
#### Kusama
- `maxPools`: `None` → `None` (not changed)
- `maxPoolMembers`: 65,536 → `None`
- `maxPoolMembersPerPool`: 1,024 → `None`
#### Westend
- `maxPools`: 512 → `None`
- `maxPoolMembers`: 524,288 → `None`
- `maxPoolMembersPerPool`: `None` → `None` (not changed)
If the community agree on these figures I will create a proposal.
Max pools on Polkadot is proposed to increase 8x to 2048, removing the perception of them being limited & promoting more interest from the community. Kusama already has a `None` limit on max pools.
We are now reaching very high numbers for `maxPoolMembers` on both Kusama and Westend, both of which are probably not impactful now - both from an economic point of view and a safety precaution in the rollout phase. `None` values in place of these numbers would be less ambiguous - we should not try to give meaning to these very large numbers if they do not contribute any benefit to the network.
`maxPoolMembersPerPool` at `None` is something that is already in effect on Westend and Polkdaot. This proposal will also update Kusama & remove the limitation.
---
### Author:  [@OliverTY](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/OliverTY)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2023, 11:05am UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/next-revision-of-increasing-nomination-pool-limits/2498/2 "2023-04-03T11:05:49Z")
Is there a bottleneck with the current `maxPools` and `maxPoolMembers` or what is the reason for the change?
I dont see how it is useful to have unlimited `maxPoolMembers` just because it is possible.
---
### Author:  [@ross](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/ross)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2023, 12:39pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/next-revision-of-increasing-nomination-pool-limits/2498/3 "2023-04-03T12:39:46Z")
Conversely, we should not set these large numbers and pretend there is meaning to them, whereby the larger they become the less (if any) impact they have on the network. These numbers, while useful in the rollout stages, do not carry much meaning now, & carry more ambiguity than a `None` value would.
---
### Author:  [@kianenigma](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/kianenigma)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2023, 9:36pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/next-revision-of-increasing-nomination-pool-limits/2498/4 "2023-04-03T21:36:43Z")
Polkadot is almost halfway through the 16k safety cap and I given the long duration to enact changes, I think it is wise to be proactive and initiate the discussion ahead of time. So I am in favor of having this discussion now rather than when it is already almost too late.
It would be useful if you mention all 3 relevant numbers in all 3 networks for better comparison:
- `maxPools`
- `maxPoolMembers`
- `maxPoolMembersPerPool`
As for the measures, what I suggest is:
1. Kusama and Westend should be, as suggested, set to unlimited number of pools and members across the board.
2. For Polkadot, I would still suggest keeping some bounds on `maxPoolMembers` and `maxPools` for safety, but once a few more quarters are passed with no issues, all of these metrics could be set to `None` (ie _unlimited_) unless if strategically decided otherwise because of a specific reason.
Lastly, the same proposal could also be used to revisit the commission parameters, if need be.
---
### Author:  [@ross](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/ross)
#### Post date: [April 4, 2023, 5:58am UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/next-revision-of-increasing-nomination-pool-limits/2498/5 "2023-04-04T05:58:46Z")
Excellent shout with commission updates. I am leaning on the side of caution given the issues that Westend presented to us recently. Perhaps for now we can leave Polkadot alone, and closely monitor / test on Kusama - where `GlobalMaxCommission` is 10%.
If this discussion / proposal requires more time then these thoughts assume and we manage to carry out commission testing prior to this proposal going live, then we could open the door for combining.
---
### Author:  [@gpestana](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/gpestana)
#### Post date: [June 7, 2023, 11:51pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/next-revision-of-increasing-nomination-pool-limits/2498/6 "2023-06-07T23:51:41Z")
I have opened a [new issue](https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/issues/14321) to keep track of increasing the limits in the nomination pool limits and other staking related configurations. I listed the nomination members pool configurations and current state for Polkadot, Kusama and Westend.
In summary, I agree we should remove all the pool limits in Kusama and Westend. As for Polkadot, I suggest the following:
- `maxPools` from `256 -> 512` (currently at 128 pools)
- `maxPoolMembers` from `16,384 -> 49,152` (currently at 11,250 members)
- `maxPoolMembersPerPool` keep as no limit (`None`)
If we agree with these new limits, I’m happy to prepare the gvt proposals.
---
### Author:  [@kianenigma](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/kianenigma)
#### Post date: [June 8, 2023, 7:05am UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/next-revision-of-increasing-nomination-pool-limits/2498/7 "2023-06-08T07:05:13Z")
Suggestions all look good to me. Perhaps we should just be aware that with having the limits on Polkadot, we probably have to revisit them in a few months time but I think it is fine to do one more slow progression and then set them to super large values or `None`.
Also good reasons to exercise OpenGov in Polkadot 🙂
---
### Author:  [@ross](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/ross)
#### Post date: [June 8, 2023, 12:06pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/next-revision-of-increasing-nomination-pool-limits/2498/8 "2023-06-08T12:06:01Z")
In addition to the above, could we also raise the global max commission from 0% on Polkadot to 10% to mirror that of Kusama?
This would obviously have OpenGov and v9420 deployed before this parameter can be amended.
---
### Author:  [@coco](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/coco)
#### Post date: [June 25, 2023, 8:48pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/next-revision-of-increasing-nomination-pool-limits/2498/10 "2023-06-25T20:48:59Z")
Would that mean, after the change there wouldn’t be anymore validator with under 10% commission?
---
### Author:  [@tomi](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/tomi)
#### Post date: [July 4, 2023, 5:38pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/next-revision-of-increasing-nomination-pool-limits/2498/11 "2023-07-04T17:38:23Z")
No, if I understood it correctly, it means a nomination pool could set its commission between 0 and 10 %.
---
### Author:  [@ross](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/ross)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2023, 1:57pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/next-revision-of-increasing-nomination-pool-limits/2498/12 "2023-07-08T13:57:07Z")
That is correct. global maximum commission = the network-wide allowed maximum that can be set. And this is applied to pools only, not nominators.
---
### Author:  [@ankan](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/ankan)
#### Post date: [March 1, 2024, 1:26pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/next-revision-of-increasing-nomination-pool-limits/2498/13 "2024-03-01T13:26:29Z")
The current number of pool members in Polkadot is `38,652` at the time I posted this comment. Since we are slowly closing in on the max limit which is set at `49,152`, this seems a good time to bump up this thread.
It has been 486 days since the [first nomination pool was created](https://polkadot.subscan.io/extrinsic/12726652-2) on Polkadot. I believe we are at a point where we could remove some precautionary limits we have set for the pallet.
Therefore, I propose to set the following configuration for NominationPools on Polkadot.
MaxPools: 512 → `None` (unlimited)
MaxPoolMembers: 49,152 → `None` (unlimited)
Looking for feedback or any objections here. If not, I will create a opengov proposal for the same.