permanent jewelry supplies wholesale
1 thought on “permanent jewelry supplies wholesale Comparison of two consensus mechanisms (POW VS POS)”
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
permanent jewelry supplies wholesale
You must be logged in to post a comment.
wholesale guess jewelry The core architecture in the blockchain is the consensus mechanism. It can be said that it is the driver engine of the blockchain. For so many years, the mainstream is more clearly stated in the test. Stake) two mechanisms. Under the brief overview, the characteristics of the POW system are to calculate the solution of the specific algorithm by consuming a lot of computing power (typical such as hash). The production and distribution process, which is called mINING). The typical blockchain of POW has Bitcoin and Ethereum. At present Computing power to realize the inverse entropy process in the system to ensure the long -term security and stability of the system. However, POW is widely criticized that it consumes too much energy resources. In this regard, POS is considered a greener solution. As the name suggests, POS is a pledker through the assets in the pledge system, that is, coin, that is, coin In this way, the right to produce blocks. The more pledged share, the higher the probability of obtaining the right of output block, and the more rewards.
has a CAP theorem in the distributed system, which refers to the three yuan paradox in a distributed system, that is, it is impossible to meet these three characteristics at the same time: consistency (), availability (), and partitional fault tolerance tolerance. (Partition Tolerance), which can only satisfy two of them. As a distributed network, this theorem has gradually evolved into the ternary paradox of the blockchain, that is, security, decentralization (), and scalability (), which can only meet Two characteristics.
The overall view of POW system pays more attention to security and decentralization (), abandoning scalability (), which is why the throughput of the Bitcoin network is very slow. The POS system is more concerned about scalability () and decentralization (), but whether POS can really achieve decentralization (), I am more skeptical. From the perspective of conservativeism and the longer -term stability of the system, I personally stand on the side of POW firmly. It may be related to my conservative personality. It is not particularly optimistic that POS can be stable as the basic layer. Especially like the LUNA incident in May this time, the approximate process of the incident is that the algorithm stable currency on the LUNA chain is a lack of value support and the final anchor. The dollar is fixed, and it is too much to send too many USS. In addition, the exchange design defects of the USS and LUNA eventually lead to Luna's own death spiral. But the greater significance of this incident should be a warning clock. Can the POS mechanism really maintain stability and the so -called decentralization when facing short capital? It may be that the number of nodes atrophism will be fast, and it will gradually become centralized.
All system design needs to be folded according to its own positioning. From the perspective of value anchor, briefly analyze why POW will be more advantageous in the long run.
The main participants in the POW system are R