Decentralized storage has always been plagued by an irreconcilable contradiction: choosing high-security, expensive solutions or accepting low-cost, risk-laden compromises. Filecoin guarantees data security with over 25 times replication factor, but as a result, storage costs soar; Arweave pursues permanent storage, with full network redundancy leading to costs that are 100 times those of Walrus—none of these are sustainable long-term solutions.
The emergence of the Walrus protocol changes the game. Its self-developed RedStuff encoding technology represents a structural breakthrough, balancing cost, security, and flexibility.
**The technical solution is as follows:** RedStuff encoding is based on the classic Reed-Solomon erasure code but has been thoroughly reconstructed to suit the realities of decentralized networks. Data is split into two parts: primary slices and secondary slices. Primary slices require an f+1 recovery threshold and need signatures from 2f+1 nodes to ensure availability; secondary slices are generated via XOR operations, providing fault tolerance buffer, so even if two-thirds of nodes go offline, data can still be quickly restored.
The power of this binary structure is that—only 4-5 times replication factor is needed to achieve the security level of traditional schemes with 25 times replication. 1TB of data costs only $50 per year, far below traditional cloud services. Storage efficiency is improved by 100 times compared to Arweave.
**From an actual application perspective,** Walrus’s advantages are even more apparent. Arweave’s permanent storage setup becomes a bottleneck—enterprise applications often require data deletion, which it simply cannot support. While Filecoin offers low-cost options, reliability is often compromised. Walrus strikes a balance between these two dimensions, offering both practicality and cost competitiveness.
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.
14 Likes
Reward
14
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
ChainDoctor
· 11h ago
Whoa, Walrus really hit the pain point this time. The 25x replication for Filecoin was already outrageous, and the wallet was drained directly.
---
RedStuff's encoding logic is quite impressive. The separation of primary and secondary slices is really clever. Compared to Arweave's "one-size-fits-all" permanent storage, it's much more sophisticated.
---
Huh? Only $50 a year? If this price really stabilizes, traditional cloud services will be panicked.
---
Honestly, the 100x cost difference with Arweave is really outrageous. Permanent storage sounds sexy, but enterprises simply can't use it.
---
But the key still depends on node stability. In theory, 4-5x replication can match 25x, but will there be discounts in practice?
---
It feels like someone is finally making some progress in Web3 storage. It's no longer a binary choice.
---
RedStuff is based on Reed-Solomon and has been re-engineered? This technical route isn't particularly innovative, but the engineering effort is commendable.
---
Walrus has found a good balance point. Filecoin and Arweave each have their issues, and someone has to fill this gap.
View OriginalReply0
GasFeePhobia
· 11h ago
Wait, can Walrus really cut costs down to 1% of Arweave? That's a pretty impressive number... Is RedStuff genuinely solving the problem, or is it just another overhyped technology...
View OriginalReply0
AirdropHunterZhang
· 11h ago
1TB for $50 a year? Now that's what I call getting it for free. I was previously cut by Filecoin's exorbitant electricity costs for so long, but now seeing Walrus's cost performance, I'm ready to go all in.
View OriginalReply0
AirdropJunkie
· 11h ago
Wait, can Walrus's technology really be reliable? It seems like every new one claims to be the most balanced, but what’s the actual result?
RedStuff sounds good, but its replication factor drops to 4-5 times. Can it recover if two-thirds of the nodes go offline? Is this really practical for eco-friendly nodes... I’m not too convinced.
Arweave's permanent storage might actually be a selling point, depending on how you use it. For enterprises needing to delete data, it’s indeed awkward.
$50 a year sounds great, but the question is who will maintain these nodes? The incentive mechanism isn’t clearly explained.
By the way, how is Filecoin doing now? Is anyone using it?
Honestly, it still depends on ecosystem development. No matter how strong the technology is, if the community doesn’t follow, it’s all for nothing.
View OriginalReply0
NFTBlackHole
· 11h ago
RedStuff encoding is indeed impressive, but the real test is whether it can withstand millions of nodes once it goes live.
Decentralized storage has always been plagued by an irreconcilable contradiction: choosing high-security, expensive solutions or accepting low-cost, risk-laden compromises. Filecoin guarantees data security with over 25 times replication factor, but as a result, storage costs soar; Arweave pursues permanent storage, with full network redundancy leading to costs that are 100 times those of Walrus—none of these are sustainable long-term solutions.
The emergence of the Walrus protocol changes the game. Its self-developed RedStuff encoding technology represents a structural breakthrough, balancing cost, security, and flexibility.
**The technical solution is as follows:** RedStuff encoding is based on the classic Reed-Solomon erasure code but has been thoroughly reconstructed to suit the realities of decentralized networks. Data is split into two parts: primary slices and secondary slices. Primary slices require an f+1 recovery threshold and need signatures from 2f+1 nodes to ensure availability; secondary slices are generated via XOR operations, providing fault tolerance buffer, so even if two-thirds of nodes go offline, data can still be quickly restored.
The power of this binary structure is that—only 4-5 times replication factor is needed to achieve the security level of traditional schemes with 25 times replication. 1TB of data costs only $50 per year, far below traditional cloud services. Storage efficiency is improved by 100 times compared to Arweave.
**From an actual application perspective,** Walrus’s advantages are even more apparent. Arweave’s permanent storage setup becomes a bottleneck—enterprise applications often require data deletion, which it simply cannot support. While Filecoin offers low-cost options, reliability is often compromised. Walrus strikes a balance between these two dimensions, offering both practicality and cost competitiveness.