Figure 1 - uploaded by Zongyang Zhang
Content may be subject to copyright.
Blockchain Layers.

Blockchain Layers.

Source publication
Preprint
Full-text available
Sharding is the prevalent approach to breaking the trilemma of simultaneously achieving decentralization, security, and scalability in traditional blockchain systems, which are implemented as replicated state machines relying on atomic broadcast for consensus on an immutable chain of valid transactions. Sharding is to be understood broadly as techn...

Contexts in source publication

Context 1
... shown in Figure 10, A is used to denote new nodes, i.e., all nodes that want to participate in the protocol. B represents selected new nodes and C refers to confirmed committees. ...
Context 2
... name to distinguish nodes as Paxos, i.e., primary and backup nodes. In a partially synchronous network, PBFT assumes the í µí±¢ = 3 í µí±“ + 1 model. Message authentication codes (MAC) [169] are used to achieve identity authentication between nodes in PBFT. In the normal cases, PBFT relies on the operations to process proposals as shown in Fig. ...
Context 3
... shown in Fig. 12, í µí± í µí±Ž refers to the proposal of node í µí±Ž in the first round. The message of the first round is denoted as í µí±š 1 . í µí±š 1 is broadcast by node í µí±Ž. Then the other nodes verify í µí±š 1 and vote for it. Node í µí± acts as a leader and collects valid votes. When the number of valid votes reaches 2 í µí±“ + 1, node í ...
Context 4
... 2PC. The basic procedure is shown in Fig. 13. A client is responsible for collecting proofs in the prepare phase and transmitting them to related shards in the commit phase. Omniledger [58] adopts the client-driven 2PC methods to process cross-shard transactions. In the prepare phase, an availability certificate is named as a proof-of-acceptance or a proof-of-rejection. A ...
Context 5
... flowchart is shown in Fig. 14. Note that in Fig. 14(a), all input shards act as the coordinators, which means the availability certificates are transferred by the input shard directly. In Fig. 14(b), an output shard plays the role of a coordinator, collects the availability certificates, and forwards them to relative shards. We argue that in normal cases, the ...
Context 6
... flowchart is shown in Fig. 14. Note that in Fig. 14(a), all input shards act as the coordinators, which means the availability certificates are transferred by the input shard directly. In Fig. 14(b), an output shard plays the role of a coordinator, collects the availability certificates, and forwards them to relative shards. We argue that in normal cases, the communication complexity of ...
Context 7
... flowchart is shown in Fig. 14. Note that in Fig. 14(a), all input shards act as the coordinators, which means the availability certificates are transferred by the input shard directly. In Fig. 14(b), an output shard plays the role of a coordinator, collects the availability certificates, and forwards them to relative shards. We argue that in normal cases, the communication complexity of the two methods above is identical since the messages are simply collected and forwarded, without being aggregated, so the total number of ...
Context 8
... transaction split based approach is proposed in RapidChain [59] to handle cross-shard transactions by splitting a multi-input multi-output transaction into multiple single-input single-output transactions. A simple example is shown in Fig. ...
Context 9
... transaction split based approach shown in Fig. 15, e.g., RapidChain [59], there might exist several possible problems. • The way to generate a specific public key managed by í µí° ¶ í µí±œí µí±¢í µí±¡ is unclear. The rule determining which shard is responsible for managing an input is not given. In the general case, it is based on public keys. In other words, the hash value of the ...
Context 10
... cuckoo rule. Reconfiguration under the bounded Cuckoo rule is shown in Fig. 16. This rule dynamically adjusts the members of each committee based on the number of active members in each committee. At the end of epoch í µí±’, all committees are sorted according to the activeness level of all nodes, that is, the total number of transactions processed during the epoch. The 1/2 committees with the highest activeness ...
Context 11
... shown in Figure 10, A is used to denote new nodes, i.e., all nodes that want to participate in the protocol. B represents selected new nodes and C refers to confirmed committees. ...
Context 12
... name to distinguish nodes as Paxos, i.e., primary and backup nodes. In a partially synchronous network, PBFT assumes the í µí±¢ = 3 í µí±“ + 1 model. Message authentication codes (MAC) [169] are used to achieve identity authentication between nodes in PBFT. In the normal cases, PBFT relies on the operations to process proposals as shown in Fig. ...
Context 13
... shown in Fig. 12, í µí± í µí±Ž refers to the proposal of node í µí±Ž in the first round. The message of the first round is denoted as í µí±š 1 . í µí±š 1 is broadcast by node í µí±Ž. Then the other nodes verify í µí±š 1 and vote for it. Node í µí± acts as a leader and collects valid votes. When the number of valid votes reaches 2 í µí±“ + 1, node í ...
Context 14
... 2PC. The basic procedure is shown in Fig. 13. A client is responsible for collecting proofs in the prepare phase and transmitting them to related shards in the commit phase. Omniledger [58] adopts the client-driven 2PC methods to process cross-shard transactions. In the prepare phase, an availability certificate is named as a proof-of-acceptance or a proof-of-rejection. A ...
Context 15
... flowchart is shown in Fig. 14. Note that in Fig. 14(a), all input shards act as the coordinators, which means the availability certificates are transferred by the input shard directly. In Fig. 14(b), an output shard plays the role of a coordinator, collects the availability certificates, and forwards them to relative shards. We argue that in normal cases, the ...
Context 16
... flowchart is shown in Fig. 14. Note that in Fig. 14(a), all input shards act as the coordinators, which means the availability certificates are transferred by the input shard directly. In Fig. 14(b), an output shard plays the role of a coordinator, collects the availability certificates, and forwards them to relative shards. We argue that in normal cases, the communication complexity of ...
Context 17
... flowchart is shown in Fig. 14. Note that in Fig. 14(a), all input shards act as the coordinators, which means the availability certificates are transferred by the input shard directly. In Fig. 14(b), an output shard plays the role of a coordinator, collects the availability certificates, and forwards them to relative shards. We argue that in normal cases, the communication complexity of the two methods above is identical since the messages are simply collected and forwarded, without being aggregated, so the total number of ...
Context 18
... transaction split based approach is proposed in RapidChain [59] to handle cross-shard transactions by splitting a multi-input multi-output transaction into multiple single-input single-output transactions. A simple example is shown in Fig. ...
Context 19
... transaction split based approach shown in Fig. 15, e.g., RapidChain [59], there might exist several possible problems. • The way to generate a specific public key managed by í µí° ¶ í µí±œí µí±¢í µí±¡ is unclear. The rule determining which shard is responsible for managing an input is not given. In the general case, it is based on public keys. In other words, the hash value of the ...
Context 20
... cuckoo rule. Reconfiguration under the bounded Cuckoo rule is shown in Fig. 16. This rule dynamically adjusts the members of each committee based on the number of active members in each committee. At the end of epoch í µí±’, all committees are sorted according to the activeness level of all nodes, that is, the total number of transactions processed during the epoch. The 1/2 committees with the highest activeness ...

Similar publications

Article
Full-text available
Gout and chronic kidney disease (CKD) frequently coexist, but quality evidence to guide gout management in people with CKD is lacking. Use of urate-lowering therapy (ULT) in the context of advanced CKD varies greatly, and professional bodies have issued conflicting recommendations regarding the treatment of gout in people with concomitant CKD. As a...