See what these seven developers have to say about their development and deployment experience on the Arbitrum mainnet

What is the actual performance and cost performance of the Arbitrum network?

Interview: Pan Zhixiong
Teams interviewed: DeGate, DODO, EthSign, imToken, Mak Wallet, MCDEX, WePiggy

As one of the first EVM-compatible Rollup scaling solutions to go live, Arbitrum has opened up access to the main network to developers and has been running for exactly one month. Many development teams at home and abroad have been actively trying and deploying it, and everyone is optimistic about the overall maturity of the network, but some components, such as the block browser, are still in the early stages and may affect project development.

The Layer 2 network is called Arbitrum One to distinguish it from Arbitrum as a technology. Although it has been deployed on the main ethereum network, the team is still calling it a beta version of the main network to ensure security, and it is only available for early deployment by developers.

Outside of Arbitrum, Optimism is a similar technology solution, but since going live on the restricted mainnet in the first quarter and picking Synthetix to work with, it has not yet been tested on a larger scale and has been delayed once, saying it will go live in July.

Matter Labs says zkSync 2.0 will go live in August, and is less compatible than the first two, not supporting some of the less commonly used EVM opcodes; and StarkWare’s StarkNet StarkWare’s StarkNet solution is only available in beta this month, and the main network is expected to be available by the end of this year at the earliest.

In order to get a more intuitive understanding of the state Arbitrum One is in, Chain News interviewed seven teams that are accessing the Arbitrum network, including DeFi, applications, wallets and other upstream and downstream. We hope to restore a more comprehensive picture of the state of Arbitrum One’s main network through the different perspectives of these developers.

Overall, these teams have very good opinions on the maturity and completeness of Arbitrum One, and most of the tools and infrastructure are already supported or will be migrated soon (e.g. Chainlink and The Graph).

The focus of the complaints is on the imperfection of the current block browser, which may affect the speed of development, but Etherscan is the most widely used block browser in the industry, and it should not be difficult for them to add more features to Arbitrum One’s block browser. The difference in how Gas is calculated has also been mentioned several times, so developers will need to pay attention to the differences in this section.

It is also interesting to note that since Arbitrum One uses a proof-of-fraud-like mechanism, which is one of the most important security features of the network, it was thought that developers would be concerned about the various tests and exercises for proof-of-fraud on the network itself, but they have not been. However, early on, it is likely that the network will be maintained by an official or trusted third party, so security should not be a problem.

The most optimistic team believes that the network is ready to be opened, but the more cautious team believes that it may take up to 6 months.

In addition to the above summary, the interview focused on these topics.

Is EVM compatibility really what it’s advertised to be, and how much work is involved in the overall migration?

How stable is the network? Are the development tools and infrastructure seamlessly migratable?

What is the actual performance and cost performance of the Arbitrum network?

How long is it expected to be fully open to the main network?

Question 1: When you migrated to Arbitrum, did you need to adjust the smart contracts on the original Ether L1? What is the overall amount of work for this migration?
MCDEX: There is no code adjustment for smart contracts during migration. Since our tokens are issued on L1, we have some cross-chain communication requirements and need to write code.

DODO: No adjustment is needed, and the workload is very small, because DODO has a multi-chain strategy, so it prepared a lot of scripts when migrating BSC from Ether at the beginning. But the front-end product needs some work, because DODO’s product is more complex, with many caches and data middle layers, and it took some time to migrate these contents.

WePiggy: When migrating to Arbitrum, the smart contracts on the original Ether L1 basically did not need to be adjusted. Only the OpenZeppelin contract was upgraded to the latest version.

DeGate: There was basically no need to tweak the smart contract, and we didn’t encounter it in our contract. If you are using block and gas related data, note the following difference points.

Differences from Solidity on Ethereum”.

imToken: The amount of work is not high, because it is EVM compatible, so it is relatively smooth. But the workload is in the environment, as well as system monitoring, to an additional set of system maintenance and monitoring.

Maci Wallet: We can focus on the smart contract of assets across chains, Arbitrum provides a default Token Bridging mechanism, all L1 ERC20 and ERC721 assets on Arbitrum have a default automatic mapping contract, no need to redeploy ERC20 or ERC721 contracts on the project side, very convenient, I believe this mechanism will be a large number of L1 assets migrate to Arbitrum L2.

EthSign: Currently not deployable except for the need to reconfigure Truffle network settings. Initially, it was determined that Arbitrum’s EVM is not compatible with OpenZeppelin contracts (e.g. the most basic Ownable) and that logic that works fine on other networks will simply revert during deployment.

Question 2: Is the infrastructure on Arbitrum closer to that on Ether L1, e.g. development tools, IDE, Chainlink, The Graph, how stable is it and have you encountered any problems?
WePiggy: We have been tracking the development progress of Arbitrum since the Kovan3 version of Arbitrum, and have gone through Kovan3, Kovan4, Kovan5 and other versions. When we were involved in testing, we found some issues, such as block synchronization between L1 and L2, and ETH contract transfer on L2, and actively gave feedback to the Arbitrum development team, which was acknowledged by them.

MCDEX: The development tools are completely consistent, which is an amazing experience. chainlink, TheGraph are in the process of migrating to Arbitrum mainnet. The only issue is that explorer doesn’t give enough information at the moment, but it’s not a big deal. etherscan is also being deployed and will improve the explorer experience.

DODO: Not yet. The Graph is a middle tier, stability is yet to be tested (because it is not yet open to a large number of users on the main network). chainlink is part of another project and is not fully online yet, it is in the debugging phase.

DeGate: Since it is compatible with Solidity, the development tools and IDEs are common, but there may be problems with older versions of some tools, for example, Truffle failed to deploy contracts.

imToken: The development tool used is Hardhat and there is no problem, the IDE has no effect on the chain.

In terms of stability, because the test network of Arbitrum has been switched, even before there is instability, so the process has encountered some turbulence, but later much better. Overall, I think Explorer is not yet supported by Etherscan, so the amount of information is not quite enough, but it is usable. Recently, Alchemy and Infura both support Arbitrum nodes, which is relatively convenient.

EthSign: The development tools and L1 experience are basically the same, but the stability level cannot be tested because it cannot be deployed.

Question 3: Have you evaluated the performance and cost of Arbitrum at this stage, in terms of L2 performance?
DeGate: We believe that the cost of Arbitrum will be more from the cost of calldata onboarding in the longer term, and that’s where the performance bottleneck is. With a current cap of 15 million gas for an Ether block, 30% of which is filled by Arbitrum, and an average calldata gas cost of 4500 gas for L2 transactions (an ERC-20 transfer is about 1800 gas), the estimated throughput is in the range of 1000 transactions per L1 block, or 71%. transaction per L1 block, or 71 transactions/s.

MCDEX: The cost is about 1/100th, depending on the specific smart contract functionality, and the ArbGas calculation method is quite different from L1, which is something developers need to adapt to.

DODO: Theoretical analysis of the market has been a lot, the actual situation needs to wait for a large influx of users to judge.

WePiggy: From our current tests on the test network and the main network: Arbitrum’s GasLimit is relatively high, but GasPrice is very low, so that the overall cost is actually much smaller than on L1, the performance is even faster, basically second-level transactions.

imToken: Not at the moment, because it requires interaction testing, but we only test our own part of the deployment, and not with other projects.

Question 4: Have you observed the on-chain data, has Arbitrum’s proof-of-fraud design been practically rehearsed, and how well does it work?
DODO: We have not observed proof of fraud on the main network, but believe the Arbitrum team has done a thorough rehearsal.

imToken: No, this may require running nodes to be observed.

MCDEX: Have not tried.

WePiggy: We have no experience in participating in actual walkthroughs in this area.

DeGate: Have not actually observed the challenge process.

Question 5: As a developer-only mainnet, how long do you estimate the current Arbitrum will be before it’s fully open and truly usable? What infrastructure do you think is still missing in this ecosystem?
DODO: We think it’s ready to open now, but the Arbitrum team obviously wants to be more prepared, after all, it’s a highly anticipated debut, so it’s okay to be slow, it’s important not to pull it all together. The infrastructure is not lacking for us, but the stability is yet to be tested and we hope to be able to handle the huge amount of traffic.

WePiggy: Although we have officially deployed the WePiggy protocol contract to the Arbitrum One network for more than half a month, it will take another month for the Arbitrum development team to officially open the network to the general users, considering the infrastructure of the browser, cross-chain bridge and prophecy machine.

At present, most of the Ethernet infrastructures have officially announced to enter the Arbitrum ecosystem, so we can only silently expect them to finish the development, deployment and testing work as soon as possible, and we can’t rush them. I personally think that the infrastructure is still missing: more developer-friendly SDK, more backup nodes, etc.

MCDEX: It is not easy to judge the opening time. There is nothing missing from the infrastructure, as it is all being migrated.

DeGate: Feels like it will take 3 to 6 months, still in early system improvement phase, lack of more trusted third party verification nodes involved in governance, as not every developer can run a heavy verification node.

Maci wallet: There are still some basic tools in the internal testing phase, such as the Arbitrum version of Etherscan, the current official browser does not work well, such as the lack of contract validation features may lead to some security issues. We have tested the node operation and basic functions and there is nothing wrong with it, and the wallet support for Arbitrum has been completed, which will be released for general users when it is fully open.

EthSign: What’s missing is a way to get token quickly. The current bridge is too slow, and it takes several minutes for a token to cross the bridge. Secondly, the incompatibility with the OpenZeppelin type of industry standard contract needs to be completely fixed.


A more complete explorer.

A gateway or scheme that can have fast withdrawal.

Currently, the project parties are relatively developed and deployed separately, and need to be tested interactively.

Posted by:CoinYuppie,Reprinted with attribution to:
Coinyuppie is an open information publishing platform, all information provided is not related to the views and positions of coinyuppie, and does not constitute any investment and financial advice. Users are expected to carefully screen and prevent risks.

Like (0)
Donate Buy me a coffee Buy me a coffee
Previous 2021-07-01 01:59
Next 2021-07-01 02:02

Related articles