2026-01-13 13:26:27

The decentralized storage field has been cycling repeatedly—security requires cost, higher costs lead to redundancy, and eventually, it gets stuck. Looking at current solutions makes it clear: Filecoin's approach is to replicate data 25 times to ensure security, but the cost skyrockets; Arweave tries to reduce costs but struggles with dynamic data updates.

Walrus adopts a different approach. Its RedStuff 2D encoding technology replaces traditional complex polynomial calculations with lightweight XOR operations. What does this mean? The replication factor can be reduced to 4-5 times, and performance becomes more stable. The key is fault tolerance—even if two-thirds of the shards are lost, the system can quickly recover data, with read latency reduced to milliseconds.

This is not just parameter optimization but a paradigm shift in storage architecture. Moving from passive protection through cold backups to active management of dynamic hot storage clears the biggest obstacle for large-scale Web3 multimedia applications (such as on-chain videos and large file storage).

FIL-2,81%

AR-3,92%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

7 Likes

Reward
7
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

governance_ghost

· 01-13 13:56

Filecoin's 25x replication is really outrageous. Never thought about whether this approach might eventually backfire on itself. Walrus's XOR encoding idea is indeed innovative. Achieving 4 to 5 times replication is already impressive. However, for dynamic data, actual performance benchmarks are still needed. Good-looking parameters on paper don't necessarily guarantee reliability. Finally, someone is thinking about solving the problem from the architecture level, rather than just piling up costs.

View OriginalReply0

StableBoi

· 01-13 13:52

Filecoin's 25x replication is truly impressive—costly, labor-intensive, and unstable. Walrus compressing to 4-5x still ensures recovery speed, feels like a realization of something. XOR encoding is something that should have been thought of long ago—much faster than those complex algorithms. On-chain video definitely lacks such solutions; looking forward to seeing how it performs in practice. Solving the redundancy dilemma would be a major event. This architectural approach is indeed different; I appreciate the shift from passive to active. This is the kind of innovative thinking that should exist. Wait, is there really no way for Arweave? Seems like there's still room for improvement.

View OriginalReply0

EternalMiner

· 01-13 13:51

25x replication? Oh my, Filecoin's costs are already outrageous, and Walrus's 4-5x compression is really a blow to the head. Walrus's approach is quite innovative, replacing polynomial operations with XOR, simple, crude, and effective. RedStuff 2D looks like it was tailor-made for on-chain video, finally someone has identified the bottleneck in storage. Milliseconds-level latency with three-quarters fault tolerance and sharding? If this is truly stable, Filecoin's approach will need to be re-evaluated. But I'm afraid it's just hype again; Walrus needs to back up its claims with data. A paradigm shift in architecture sounds impressive, but whether it can truly be implemented remains to be seen. Four to five times vs. twenty-five times, the comparison is a bit brutal, and Filecoin must be getting nervous.

View OriginalReply0

PessimisticOracle

· 01-13 13:49

Finally, someone mentioned the 25x replication of Filecoin, which is outrageous. Who can bear that cost? RedStuff is indeed impressive, but is XOR really stable? I have a feeling there's a pit I haven't stepped into. Walrus wants to break the cycle, but is the ecosystem enough? 4-5x replication sounds great, but will it be a different story once it goes live? Wait, milliseconds latency? Where does this data come from? Arweave is a bit awkward now. What is it benchmarking against? If we really want to solve on-chain video, it's not just a storage issue. This sounds good, but the implementation difficulty is still ahead. RedStuff 2D encoding falls apart from a different perspective?

View OriginalReply0

SmartContractPlumber

· 01-13 13:47

Wait, does RedStuff use XOR for 2D encoding polynomial? The idea itself is fine, but I have to ask—have they audited the boundary conditions for fault recovery? Losing two-thirds of shards sounds great for quick recovery, but in distributed systems, "quick" is the easiest way to fail. Millisecond-level latency always looks good on paper, but real network fluctuations quickly reveal the truth. I've seen too many storage projects boast about their parameters, only to have re-entrancy vulnerabilities emerge one after another in production environments.

View OriginalReply0