- The traditional two-party system in a decentralized storage network has revealed issues of scalability.
- The introduction of Parallel Consensus Spheres can revolutionize the scalability of storage protocols.
In the landscape of decentralized storage networks, two parties typically cooperate to secure and maintain data availability. In this tandem, one party acts as the provider, storing data, while the other, termed validators or miners, compensates the provider. Through this, a trustless environment functions without central interference. These validators form a consensus, such as the Tendermint Consensus Layer seen in Jackal, ensuring a unanimous decentralized truth.
The #Cosmos eco is well positioned to have multiple blockchains building #Web3 infrastructure due to interoperability and a customizable stack.
In the Cloud Storage field, @Jackal_Protocol is introducing ‘’Parallel Consensus Spheres’’, a novel model to scale storage networks 👇 https://t.co/0InrNWOyL3
— Cosmos – Internet of Blockchains ⚛️ (@cosmos) June 7, 2023
Providers subsequently submit mathematical proofs to these validator networks, independently confirmed for validity through consensus.
However, reaching consensus can often be a time-consuming affair, sometimes stretching to several seconds or even hours for proof validation. To maintain network scalability, the consensus engine often caps the data processed at a single time, creating a theoretical limit on the network’s data handling capacity.
The challenge intensifies when requiring quick validation for large files. Proofs exist on a speed-to-size continuum; larger proofs are faster to create and vice versa. While it might seem ideal to pack as many small proofs into a single block as possible, generating numerous slow proofs can hinder providers and limit the number of files they can manage.
In such a scenario, a scalable storage network must be adept at handling many files simultaneously, both from the storage provider and the blockchain consensus.
Across decentralized storage networks, files are validated in a similar manner via Merkle Trees. This hashing technique verifies that a small segment of a file forms part of a larger file set. By storing the file’s root on the blockchain and periodically posting proofs of random file pieces, the network essentially validates the whole file.
While ZK-Snarks have been considered as a potential scaling solution for storage networks, they often result in a slow generation of proofs due to their small leaf sizes. What’s desirable is a quick solution that doesn’t require significant block space. This quest leads us to the concept of Layer-2s, networks where transactions occur off-chain, and the state of the secondary network is periodically committed to the base blockchain.
A novel approach would involve creating and verifying proofs off-chain and then committing a validation of the proof’s credibility, not the proof itself. Such a method offers two key advantages: swift generation of proofs and no block space consumption.
However, without a consensus layer such as Tendermint to secure a trustless environment, the verification of proofs off-chain by a single party poses a significant security risk. Hence, the creation of ‘consensus spheres,’ which depend on the base Tendermint consensus layer for proof verification, becomes crucial.
Under this system, storage providers request a new attestation form from the blockchain, linked to an on-chain storage deal. Once this form reaches two-thirds completion, it automatically reports to the blockchain that the deal is verified. We presume, like Tendermint, that at least two-thirds of the network is honest and responding correctly for security’s sake.
The creation of multiple consensus spheres simultaneously allows for parallel and overlapping consensus spheres, effectively scaling horizontally. This strategy distributes the block space and computational power required for proofing from the blockchain to storage providers.
However, security concerns remain. Possessing control over two-thirds of the storage provider network could potentially compromise network security. To counteract this, collateral can be added when creating a new provider, thus establishing an economic attack barrier.
The cost of creating providers exceeding two-thirds of the network’s worth should ideally surpass the potential gain from a successful attack.
