2026-01-13 22:25:19

Dusk's Succinct Attestation consensus protocol indeed has unique advantages when adapting to financial scenarios. It abandons the complexity of PoW and the ambiguity of ordinary PoS, reducing transaction finality to 3-5 seconds, after which it becomes completely immutable. Early testing results are promising—handling up to 10,000 transactions per day with a success rate of 99.8%, a level that can truly meet the requirements of securities trading and small cross-border payments.

From a security perspective, the node staking DUSK token constraint mechanism is quite strict, with a violation cost of 1.5 times the staked amount. Early data shows a node violation rate of only 0.3%, indicating that the incentive design is effective.

The problem arises. During the Q4 2025 stress test, when transaction concurrency reached 500 TPS, confirmation latency skyrocketed to 8 seconds, and 2.1% of transactions experienced temporary confirmation failures. This is still far from the "peak 1000 TPS + zero latency" required by financial institutions. Cross-chain protocol adaptation is even more of a weak point; currently, it can only be achieved indirectly through third parties, which is 40% less efficient than specialized cross-chain protocols and costs 35% more in fees.

The most troublesome part is the upgrade cost. Just a small version optimization for compliance parameters took two months to get all nodes up to speed, and such iteration efficiency is really a bit damaging for financial operations.

DUSK5,52%

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.

10 Likes

Reward
10
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MetaDreamer

· 20h ago

Small-scale performance is pretty good, but 500TPS just can't keep up? The gap is indeed a bit awkward... Financial scenarios require stability, and it takes 2 months to upgrade a parameter. How can we compete with traditional exchanges?

View OriginalReply0

ZenMiner

· 01-14 01:03

3-5 seconds to confirm sounds good, but 500 TPS just drops the ball. The pitfalls in financial scenarios are still a bit deep.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropHarvester

· 01-13 22:55

3-5 seconds confirmation sounds good, but the stress test immediately revealed the true nature. 500 TPS directly delayed to 8 seconds, which is not the same as what was advertised. Early data looks impressive, but can real financial scenarios achieve this level? Or are we waiting for the next version's story again? Cross-chain efficiency is 40% lower, and the fees are 35% higher. Is this deal worth it? Just want to ask, can the Dusk protocol currently be used in a production environment, or is it still more of a concept than practical implementation? Such a long upgrade cycle? Only two months to catch up, but the financial sector can't wait.

View OriginalReply0

DecentralizedElder

· 01-13 22:54

3-5 seconds to confirm sounds pretty good, but 500 TPS can't handle it, and the latency skyrocketed to 8 seconds... This routine feels a bit familiar, it's another test bull and launch wolf.

View OriginalReply0

BTCWaveRider

· 01-13 22:52

3-5 seconds to confirm sounds good, but once it comes to stress testing, the true nature is revealed—can't handle 500 TPS. Cross-chain still relies on third parties, isn't that just a different form of centralization? It's a bit awkward. It took two months to synchronize the upgrade. Can the financial industry afford to wait? This pace is really...

View OriginalReply0

DaoGovernanceOfficer

· 01-13 22:41

ok so the 99.8% success rate sounds nice until you hit 500 TPS and suddenly it's 2.1% failures. empirically speaking, that's not a rounding error—that's a systemic issue nobody wants to talk about

Reply0

LightningLady

· 01-13 22:32

Good-looking numbers, but as soon as pressure comes, they reveal their true nature. 500 TPS can't handle it, and financial scenarios simply can't withstand it.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidatedAgain

· 01-13 22:28

It's the same old script of "perfect testing in the early stage, failure during stress testing"... A 99.8% success rate sounds great, but then you turn around and see 2.1% confirmation failure at 500 TPS. Isn't this just self-deception before my last all-in? When the liquidation price approaches, you realize what "theoretical perfection, real-world roughness" really means. Cross-chain efficiency drops by 40%, fees increase by 35%, and isn't this cost ultimately passed on to users? In financial scenarios, precise risk control points are crucial. With this level of delay fluctuation... I don't even dare to add to my position. Node parameters are only synchronized once every two months. Can the financial industry wait that long? It's just another cycle of being liquidated by the market.

View OriginalReply0