Stellar (XLM) vs. Solana: A Comparative Analysis of State Archival Scalability

The
blockchain
landscape
is
continually
evolving,
with
various
networks
exploring
innovative
solutions
to
enhance
scalability
and
efficiency.
A
recent
analysis
by
Stellar
(XLM)
sheds
light
on
the
comparative
scalability
of
its
State
Archival
system
versus
Solana’s
Avocado,
highlighting
significant
differences
in
network
performance
and
congestion
management.

Solana’s
Network
Congestion
Challenges

Solana
has
faced
notable
challenges
with
network
congestion,
particularly
during
periods
of
high
transaction
volumes.
For
instance,
in
April
2024,
bot
trading
activity
caused
significant
congestion,
leading
to
high
transaction
drop
rates.
Although
Solana
implemented
a
patch
to
address
these
issues,
the
network’s
fundamental
design
remains
prone
to
congestion
as
the
number
of
users,
validators,
and
transactions
per
second
(TPS)
increases.

Solana’s
Avocado
proposal
aims
to
address
these
issues
by
introducing
a
mechanism
where
validators
are
paid
to
send
more
transactions.
However,
this
approach
has
raised
concerns
about
exacerbating
congestion.
Validators
would
be
incentivized
to
send
additional
transactions,
potentially
overwhelming
the
network
further.

State
Compression
Mechanism

Under
Solana’s
State
Compression
mechanism,
when
an
account
runs
out
of
rent,
a
compression
transaction
uses
zero-knowledge
proofs
to
delete
the
account
and
add
it
to
a
Merkle
binary
trie.
While
validators
only
need
to
store
the
root
of
this
trie
for
consensus,
RPC
nodes
must
store
the
full
trie
to
produce
proofs.
Additionally,
validators
can
earn
extra
by
storing
the
complete
trie
and
submitting
compression
transactions,
which
could
lead
to
network
congestion.

This
design
tradeoff
has
been
criticized
for
potentially
leading
to
redundant
transactions.
Validators
might
race
to
compress
expired
accounts
to
earn
rewards,
resulting
in
multiple
transactions
attempting
to
compress
the
same
account,
thus
consuming
valuable
network
bandwidth.

Stellar’s
Efficient
State
Archival

In
contrast,
Stellar’s
State
Archival
solution
offers
a
more
efficient
approach.
Stellar’s
validators
deterministically
archive
the
same
entries
on
a
given
schedule,
eliminating
the
need
for
additional
transactions.
This
method
addresses
the
primary
bottleneck
in
blockchain
performance—networking.

Stellar’s
network
structures
archived
state
using
a
collection
of
small,
immutable
Merkle
trees
rather
than
a
large
trie.
Validators
can
archive
new
entries
by
storing
a
small
tree
of
recently
archived
entries,
while
the
majority
of
the
archived
state
is
offloaded
in
History
Archives.
This
design
allows
Stellar
to
maintain
high
TPS
and
allocate
more
bandwidth
to
user
transactions.

According
to
Stellar,
Anatoly
Yakovenko,
co-founder
of
Solana,
considered
a
deterministic
compression
approach
but
ultimately
decided
against
it,
citing
the
need
for
all
validators
to
maintain
the
entire
state
as
part
of
the
snapshot.
However,
Stellar’s
method
of
using
smaller
Merkle
trees
and
History
Archives
offers
a
viable
alternative
that
enhances
network
efficiency
and
scalability.

Concluding
Thoughts

The
comparative
analysis
between
Stellar’s
State
Archival
and
Solana’s
Avocado
underscores
the
importance
of
efficient
network
design
in
blockchain
scalability.
While
Solana’s
approach
may
lead
to
increased
congestion,
Stellar’s
deterministic
archival
method
provides
a
scalable
solution
that
optimizes
network
performance.

For
more
detailed
insights,
the
full
analysis
can
be
found
on

Stellar’s
official
blog.

Image
source:
Shutterstock