Original link: https://www.hellobtc.com/kp/du/08/3998.html
Author: Five Fireball Leader / Source: Vernacular Blockchain
Author | Five Fireball Leaders
Produced | Vernacular Blockchain (ID: helloBTC)
At present, the hottest things in the circle, in addition to ETH’s Merge, Move is the new public chain of Aptos and Sui, which is probably the two most popular words in the “hot search list in the circle”.
After all, the launch of ICP was known as “closing the door of the public chain”, but I didn’t expect this door to be opened again…
So simply look at the status quo and differences between these two public chains?
01
Status of the public chain
In fact, strictly speaking, the door of the public chain is not opened by Aptos or Sui. At present, there are many new technologies in the circle that continue to expand in the field of public chain. The first one is the modular public chain led by Celestia.
The earliest L2 form of Polkadot, Cosmos, and ETH is actually a modular form, but only two layers: settlement + execution .
Then Celestia took the DA layer (date data layer) out of the settlement side, and made a three-layer model, which has now become widely popular, and can even split the consensus and execution again into a four-layer model. , and there is this picture today?
Among them are the form of Validium on the ether side, and the new form of the sovereign Rollup on the side of Celestia.
Arbitrum is also innovating on the OP side. The recently launched mainnet Nova is based on AnyTrust technology and uses OP as the base. Usually, the pure sidechain mode is running. When something goes wrong, it switches to Rollup. The performance and cost performance are much better than pure Rollup. .
On the ZK side, there is also Starkware doing typed recursive Rollup, and we will see L3 and L4 chains coming out in the near future.
There is also an OP Rollup like Fuel, which positions itself as a “modular execution layer”, using a method similar to UTXO to explore the parallel execution method that maximizes TPS, and does not completely depend on ETH, and can also be linked in the future. Go to other settlement layers…
So on the public chain side, it is actually very lively!
02
Move and the Libra Gang
The ones mentioned above are more or less the way to innovate on the existing public chain. Aptos and Sui have completely used a new language to start a new chain. Where does the confidence come from?
Just two things:
-
Move bottom layer
-
Libra Yuwei and capital boost
Let’s look at Move first – this is a language evolved from Rust. The biggest difference between him and Solidity is that he attaches great importance to the concept of assets, and all designs are designed with the security of assets as the primary purpose.
What do you mean, on the Solidity side, Token and the like are defined as a Value, without any restrictions, you can copy, issue, delete at will… On the Move side, Token assets are all Resource, which cannot be copied or discarded Or reuse, it can only be transferred, stored, etc., so fundamentally eliminates a lot of hacking incidents such as unlimited Token issuance caused by various loopholes in Solidity , and also makes Move theoretically become a more suitable digital asset. Blockchain language for this concept.
However, if the bottom layer is more reasonable, it will definitely win?
Views vary within the industry.
The opponents feel that although Solidity is not safe enough at the bottom, the usage habits created by a large number of programmers over the years + the safety lessons bought by tens of billions of dollars of bloody real money do not mean that a new language with a so-called better bottom layer can be used. Casually defeated, what human beings used to do in the past, the better Interlingua, Esperanto, was not completely defeated by English and Chinese. QWE, an unscientific keyboard in the era of typewriters, is still in use today. All the so-called more scientific ergonomic keyboards, It has long since disappeared in the long river of history, and the inertia of first-mover advantage and habit is much more powerful than people think.
Zheng Fang believes that the underlying insecurity is unsafe, and all kinds of hackers stealing coins are just the same mistakes made by different people. The blockchain is an environment with extremely high requirements for asset security, and the underlying security is the real security. To say that habits cannot be broken, the Internet was originally ASP, and then it was not Java, and later came to the top, and then PHP, C#, etc., and now there is a situation where a hundred flowers are blooming . Keep the advantage, otherwise who will innovate!
It makes sense to tell the truth. As for who is right and who is wrong, then we can only have a PK with real knives and real guns in the product market in the next few years to distinguish the authenticity.
03
Libra Yuwei and capital boost
The Diem that Libra wanted to do at the beginning was almost what everyone in the circle was staring at. Later, unfortunately, the SEC outside the circle also stared at it, so it could only be dissolved…
However, Yu Wei is still there, after all, this is Facebook, after all, this is a group of top engineers.
As a result, the people in the team ran out to work alone, and were immediately targeted by top-notch capital, and today’s Aptos and Sui were born.
The reason for capital is also very simple. It is a continuation of Facebook’s original aborted project. It has the most imaginative narrative on the public chain track. It has the innovation of the underlying language called Move language. It has a high ceiling of tens of billions of market value and can accommodate Investments in the hundreds of millions of dollars…and, we have a perfect precedent for Solana Capital’s success!
As a result, almost all the top-tier capital you can think of are on board. A16Z, Coinbase, Tiger Global, Binance, FTX, Duobi, Sanjian, and even Paypal Venture have all joined in, and Aptos has become their investment. ‘s first project.
04
Difference between Aptos and Sui
Judging from the white paper, the styles of the two are still different. Aptos is obviously more straightforward and Sui is more academic, but the actual difference between the two is not that big. Move, is also the main high-performance parallel computing public chain.
The difference may be reflected in the following aspects:
-
Capital level – all the top-tier capital mentioned above by Aptos is on board, while Sui only has some top-tier capital, but the valuation is both 2 billion, which is basically the same.
-
Team level – Aptos basically has only one founder who is from the original Libra team, and Sui has 5 or 6 of them all from Libra.
-
Ecological level – It is not yet on the mainnet, but Aptos is far ahead, with more than 100 ecological projects VS Sui’s dozen or twenty, Aptos wins.
-
Technical Differences – This is indeed a difference, a little more detail.
Small technical differences:
Aptos has a key rotation and recovery technology, which is more friendly than the current wallet, and the gas fee does not have to be Aptos, and supports multi-currency gas.
Sui has a mechanism for voting gas, which ensures that the gas fee is relatively stable when there is congestion , and users need to pay a storage fee in addition to the exchange fee to deal with the problem of full node state explosion.
The big difference in technology is mainly about parallel computing and TPS.
The core technology of Aptos is called Block STM – it has a little sense of OP Rollup of ETH, but he first optimistically allows multiple parallel threads to complete the modification of the shared database independently, completely ignoring that there may be other threads existing , if conflicts are not involved, a large amount of memory modification can be easily handled; if conflicts are involved, a single exchange will be rolled back and executed after the conflicting exchange is updated.
In the laboratory environment, Block STM achieves 16 times lower competition (conflict) and 8 times higher competition (conflict) performance test results compared to EVM under 32 threads.
The core technology of Sui is designed around its smallest storage unit – Object. There is no account on Sui’s side. They are all Objects (objects, or assets), generally immutable assets (similar to contracts), and a single Assets (can only be modified by their specific owner), shared assets (can be modified by multiple owners).
A simple exchange involving a single asset does not follow a consensus at all, the client directly confirms it in seconds, and the exchange of a shared asset will call the consensus, and the consensus is divided into two types – Tusk (responsible for exchange sorting) and Narwhal (memory pool protocol), the combination of the two It’s faster and more efficient.
05
summary
In short, the way to achieve high performance is different, but the data are similar, all of which are tens of thousands of TPS in the laboratory. I just don’t know that when the real mainnet goes online and goes to the real environment, there are still more than 100,000 TPS left. How many.
For capital blessing, Aptos and Sui with a high starting point, are you optimistic about their future development?
This article is reprinted from: https://www.hellobtc.com/kp/du/08/3998.html
This site is for inclusion only, and the copyright belongs to the original author.