Author of this article: @Steve_4P, the article only represents the author’s views.

Key Points Summary

· Mysten Labs has successfully launched the Sui network and the DeepBook protocol, and is now preparing to launch a new project - the Walrus protocol.

· Despite the many protocols that exist in the decentralized storage market, Walrus has garnered widespread attention for the following two reasons:

(1) Cost-effectiveness and Security: Walrus is more cost-effective and secure than existing storage solutions.

(2) Programmability: It enables the stored data to be programmatically accessed through the Sui network.

· As one of the most advanced projects in existing decentralized storage protocols, Walrus is very worthy of attention for its future practicality and value.

1. Background - Why Walrus? Why launch it now?

Mysten Labs has successfully launched the Sui network and the DeepBook protocol, and is now venturing into a new domain - the Walrus protocol. The success of the Sui network and DeepBook has generated a lot of anticipation for the Walrus project. However, despite the high enthusiasm, there are also some concerns surrounding the Walrus protocol.

These concerns stem from several factors: there are already many decentralized storage solutions in the market, many of which have not achieved ideal performance; and there are also worries about resource allocation—especially whether Mysten Labs will divert resources to continue developing and expanding the Sui network, affecting the progress of new projects.

Therefore, we will explore the structure of the Walrus protocol, analyze its differences from existing decentralized storage solutions, and further investigate the relationship between Walrus and the Sui network, focusing on how Walrus integrates with the Sui architecture and enhances the overall value of the Sui ecosystem.

1.1 The Difference Between Walrus and Existing Storage Solutions

To explain why Walrus needs to exist, we first need to discuss its differences with existing decentralized distributed storage solutions. From my perspective, there are three main differences between Walrus and existing storage models (especially Filecoin and Arweave), which can be summarized as follows:

1.1.1 Storage Cost Efficiency

First, there are significant differences in storage costs between Walrus, Arweave, and Filecoin. As discussed by Four Pillars in the Walrus article, Arweave uses a system where all nodes must replicate and store all data, while Filecoin allows users to decide how many nodes store their data (users can choose to have just one miner store their data or distribute 100 copies of data across 100 miners. Clearly, the more miners required to store the data, the higher the cost).

In contrast, Walrus uses Red-Stuff encoding, showing lower costs than Arweave and Filecoin, with efficiency up to 100 times theirs (compared to Arweave, which requires full network data storage, leading to a maximum replication cost of 500 times, while Walrus only requires 4-5 times replication). At the same time, the probability of data loss is significantly reduced.

In simple terms, Walrus addresses the shortcomings of Arweave and Filecoin. While Arweave has a low probability of data loss, its replication costs are high; Filecoin offers relatively cheap storage based on user demand, but low-cost options may come with a higher risk of data loss; whereas Walrus combines the advantages of both by maintaining low replication costs while minimizing the probability of data loss.

Moreover, for Arweave, as the number of nodes increases, costs also increase (though not linearly), as it encourages all nodes/specified nodes to store as much complete data as possible. In contrast, Walrus only requires a single network data transmission, with each node storing a portion of the data, which actually alleviates the burden on individual nodes as the network grows. This structural difference makes Walrus’s storage costs significantly more efficient than both Arweave and Filecoin.

1.1.2 Programmability

Although the efficiency of Walrus is very important compared to Arweave and Filecoin, its most significant distinction from existing storage models is “programmability.” Traditional storage is merely a simple data repository, while Walrus achieves programmable decentralized storage through the Sui network, endowing data storage with greater functionality.

What if smart contracts could directly reference or trigger data stored in decentralized storage? For example, when minting an NFT, the image file can be stored in Walrus, and its blob data object can be created on the Sui network, connecting it with the NFT object. This solves the problem of traditional NFTs being “incomplete” (traditional NFTs store tokens on-chain, but the NFT’s artistic metadata is stored off-chain), making NFTs through Walrus a true Web3 asset.

Another example directly related to data storage is that since Walrus’ blob data can be stored as Sui objects and controlled through Sui’s Move smart contract, the stored data can be transferred to other users or ownership changed automatically. That’s why we say that the data in Walrus is programmable.

In contrast, Arweave and Filecoin have very limited dynamic integration with on-chain applications, and it could even be said that it is almost impossible. Although Filecoin has added some smart contract capabilities through FVM (Filecoin Virtual Machine), the ability to modify and control data remains limited, while Walrus clearly outperforms these two protocols in terms of programmability.

1.1.3 Data Access and Deletion

Existing storage protocols have a characteristic: once data is uploaded, it can be accessed by anyone and cannot be deleted. While this feature may be useful for individual users, it poses significant limitations for institutions and enterprises that need to store sensitive data or require the ability to modify/delete data. In contrast, Walrus allows users to discard or modify their data when needed (unlike Arweave, where data cannot be deleted or modified; and unlike Filecoin, where data deletion is not a user-initiated action but occurs when a contract expires or when the node hosting the data goes offline).

Some people may be concerned that this conflicts with the principle of immutability in blockchain, but it is important to remember that what is deleted in Walrus is blob data. Transaction data unrelated to the deletion of blob data remains unchanged, and the deletion of blob data does not affect the integrity of the blockchain.

Compared to traditional storage, the enhanced practicality of Walrus greatly boosts its application potential in traditional enterprises and Web2 companies, further increasing market expectations for its diversity.

1.2 The Collaboration Method of Walrus and the Sui Network

After discussing the differences between Walrus and existing storage protocols, let’s explore the relationship between Walrus and the Sui network. When Mysten Labs announced plans to launch the Walrus protocol, many expressed skepticism, arguing that “they should focus on Sui rather than create a new protocol.” However, with a little understanding of how Walrus operates, it becomes clear that Walrus does not distract from Sui; rather, it should be seen as a storage stack aimed at enhancing applications on Sui. In other words, Walrus not only complements the Sui network from a storage perspective but also actively influences the governance token SUI of the Sui network, making the two inseparable. Next, we will explore this further.

1.2.1 The Symbiotic Relationship Between Sui and Walrus

In fact, Mysten Labs was very concerned about storage in the early design phase of Sui. Blockchain will inevitably grow in the course of use, which may lead to an increase in transaction fees for users of the Sui network in the future. So, from the early design stages of Sui, Mysten Labs came up with a unique storage fund concept to solve Sui’s storage challenges.

The operation of the Sui storage fund is as follows: The fees submitted by users to the Sui validator nodes are divided into two parts: 1) Gas fees related to computation, and 2) storage fees for data storage. Sui collects storage fees in advance when users upload data and channels these funds into the storage fund. The storage fund continuously allocates these funds to validator nodes as long as the data remains stored on the chain. Additionally, if a user deletes data, they can receive a refund of the storage fees.

Sui’s unique on-chain data storage system has produced two effects:

1. Users can receive a refund of storage fees when deleting on-chain data, creating an economic incentive to reduce the capacity of distributed ledgers.

2. The system addresses the sustainability issues related to storage by collecting storage fees in advance and using them as rewards for future validation nodes.

Although Sui addresses sustainability issues through this unique structure, storing large-scale blob data (such as media files) on-chain is still a burden. This is where Walrus comes into play—by storing large-scale blob data through Walrus and managing its metadata as objects on Sui, data can achieve programmability without being directly stored on Sui.

In addition, Walrus has achieved the most distinctive feature compared to other storage protocols through Sui - making the stored data programmable and controllable. Ultimately, a symbiotic relationship was established between Sui and Walrus, where both sides complement each other’s shortcomings, creating unique advantages.

1.2.2 Walrus makes SUI a deflationary asset

From the example of the storage fund, we can see that the Sui network requires a certain amount of SUI to be paid as storage fees for storing any object, and Walrus is no exception. When creating a blob data object in Walrus, SUI will be locked in the storage fund based on the size of the object (referring to the size of the object representing the blob, not the actual size of the blob).

Although some fees can be refunded by deleting data, a portion of the fees will have a destruction effect by permanently removing tokens to reduce circulation. In other words, the more data stored through Walrus, the more SUI will be permanently locked in the storage fund, creating a virtuous cycle where increased usage of Walrus leads to a decrease in the circulation of SUI.

In summary, the emergence of Walrus is positive news for the Sui network, both from a network perspective and an asset perspective. It is expected that through Walrus, the Sui ecosystem will develop in a more diversified direction.

2. Conclusion - Walrus will become the most critical protocol for Sui

2.1 Mysten Labs is not just building a blockchain

When Mysten Labs was first founded, I thought it was just a company focused on the Sui network. However, after seeing the launch of services like Deepbook and SuiNS, I started to wonder what kind of vision Mysten Labs was pursuing. When I met Walrus, I realized that their goal was to build a complete Web3 decentralized infrastructure.

Compared to other companies, Mysten Labs has a different time perspective when looking at the industry. They are not just issuing tokens, generating hype, and quickly monetizing; instead, they have a vision to lead innovation in various areas such as execution, storage, consensus, and communication, while understanding users’ inertia towards Web2 services and creating the UI that best suits them.

The Sui network handles execution and consensus (constantly evolving through programs like Mysticeti, Pilotfish, and Remora), storage is managed by Walrus, and communication is facilitated by SCION (a next-generation internet architecture capable of protecting network packets, known for its DDoS protection and immunity to routing attacks – it is important to note that SCION was not created by Mysten Labs, but it will be applied within the Sui network). The UI familiar to Web2 users is managed by zkLogin, Stashed, SEAL, and KELP.

If these plans can all be successfully implemented, I believe Mysten Labs has the potential to rewrite the existing Web3 paradigm. My initial thoughts were limited; Mysten Labs is not just looking to build a blockchain—they are a team constructing infrastructure for a new network. Of course, I think Sui is at the core of Mysten Labs’ vision, and the other plans play complementary roles. Walrus is also important; in my view, Walrus may be the most significant protocol among them.

2.2 Walrus is not limited to the Sui ecosystem

However, Walrus is not limited to the Sui ecosystem. Like other storage protocols, Walrus can be used by any third party, not just Sui applications, and it could even serve as a strong alternative to existing storage protocols, or as an alternative solution to other DA layers such as Celestia, EigenDA, and Avail.

The availability of Walrus expands the demand for SUI beyond the Sui network. When Walrus is used, data objects are created on the Sui network, resulting in a reduction in the circulation of SUI. In other words, Walrus has the potential to make SUI a more attractive asset by creating external demand (this is not investment advice, but a structurally possible scenario). Therefore, Walrus is expected to become a bridge, extending Sui in various directions.

2.3 Can Walrus Surpass Filecoin?

While caution is needed when comparing the value of a particular protocol, I am very optimistic about the future of Walrus because: 1) it operates far more efficiently than existing storage protocols, 2) it can perform tasks that existing storage protocols can’t do (such as being a DA or making stored data programmable), and 3) it already has a solid network and user base through the Sui network.

If Walrus is not just the storage layer of the Sui network, but becomes the representative storage protocol of Web3 as envisioned by Mysten Labs, it has the potential to become the leading protocol in the storage field.

This article is from a submission and does not represent the views

：