Are modular blockchains the answer to scalability problems?

We refer to it in the industry as the "trilemna blockchain." Indeed, scalability, security, and decentralisation are the three peaks in the diagram that crypto initiatives fight for. When creating a blockchain, only two factors may be optimised; the other must be somewhat compromised. This presents a challenge.

For instance, Ethereum lacks scalability (only 25 transactions per second and expensive transaction fees) and prioritises security and decentralisation. Moreover, this is the reason Ehtereum chose to concentrate more on their L2 network. where initiatives such as Polygon might try to address the inadequate scalability of the ETH network's first layer.

Thus, for a number of years now, this trio has guided the growth of the sector. Up until the advent of blockchain modulars. Thus, the trilemna becomes a conundrum: is the blockchain modular or monolithic?

To put it briefly, monolithic blockchains are those whose architecture unifies consensus, execution, settlement, and data availability onto a single, distinct blockchain.

A modular blockchain, on the other hand, has all or at least some of its components off-chain on another blockchain. Comparable differences exist between a robot that is marketed as a single unit and another that is sold in modular and detachable sections. This expands the range of options and accelerates the development of the latter's traits.

A little over a year ago, modular blockchains started to emerge. They have the potential to resolve the trilemma that has plagued the sector ever since its inception.

While Ethereum and other similar projects use an L2 ecosystem to mimic the features of a modular blockchain, inter-L2 blockchain connectivity adds a layer of complexity. This is another reason why the industry has been concentrating for a number of years on interoperability as a key area.

Modular blockchain, on the other hand, provides an integrated, modular ecosystem that solves these interoperability problems. It can be simplified to resemble a blockchain that is similar to Legos.

Furthermore worth mentioning is the apparent path that Ethereum's roll-up technology is taking. It's evident that Ethereum is ahead of an industry trend that is inevitable. Nevertheless, roll ups need to be extremely technically skilled in order to be flawlessly integrated into an active blockchain that is linked to hundreds of L2 projects.

The advantages and various layers of the modular blockchain

Transactions and user interaction with the blockchain happen here during execution. For this reason, faster transactions are possible with monolithic blockchains that prioritise their execution layer while maintaining data security.

The industry's most delicate and challenging layer to manage is consensus and security. Litecoin, Bitcoin, and Ethereum appear to be the clear leaders in this space right now.

Data availability: This layer enables nodes to access transaction data so that it can be appropriately processed.

Modular blockchains' capacity to incorporate "zk proof," or data availability fraud proof, technology is one of its key features. Scalability is greatly increased because nodes do not have to complete every transaction in order to validate them, thanks to this technology.

Ethereum's EVM aims to address issue, however nodes are still required to confirm consensus and transaction validity.

What kind of future?

Interoperability will undoubtedly be essential if developers continue to favour monolithic blockchains as their preferred solution. Competition could encourage creativity in combining the three roles, with hundreds of new initiatives competing for the best position in the trilemnae diagram.

Ethereum is undoubtedly setting the standard and currently has the most reliable and exciting roadmap. But a roadmap is still a roadmap, and following it through might be tricky. Ethereum has performed well thus far, especially with the implementation of Proof-Of-Stake, which was arguably the most delicate change.

All things considered, modular blockchains hold great potential and, more importantly, provide a backup plan in case monolithic blockchains reach a growth dead end. Additionally, by breaking things down into "spare parts," engineers are able to concentrate on a limited number of specifics, which promotes innovation.

In summary
Industry adoption of the technology will increase as modular blockchain development continues. Though it might take a few months or years, initiatives like Celestia appear to indicate that the industry's future is at risk of being completely upended. It is likely that many developers heard about this modular blockchain as it created a stir in the industry.

From a development perspective, the industry may be entering its most exciting years as the potentially historic bull market draws near. Modular blockchains will undoubtedly be present as well.

---