模块化，搞还是不搞？ ：对区块链架构的思考以及berachain如何融入其中

To be or not to be, modularity?: Thoughts on blockchain architectures and how berachain fits in

模块化区块链有什么用？(What’s the deal with modular blockchains)

There has been a lot of discussion comparing modular blockchains and monolithic blockchains. As it stands, no blockchain’s dominance remains uncontested, and new projects enter the market with each passing day. In just a few clicks, anyone can deploy an application-specific rollup, or spin up an infrastructure project catering to one of the crucial verticals within the modular stack. Users have a nearly endless supply of options for transacting on-chain, and developers have an even larger number of permutations they can choose from in designing their blockchain’s architecture - why is this?

关于模块化区块链和整体区块链的比较已经有很多讨论。就目前情况而言，随着新项目日渐进入市场，没有哪个区块链的主导地位是不受争议的，。只需点击几下，任何人都可以部署特定于应用的汇总，或启动一个基础设施项目来满足模块化堆栈中关键垂直领域之一的需求。用户有几乎无穷无尽的链上交易选项，开发人员在设计区块链架构时可以选择更多的排列(权衡) - 这是为何？

Every blockchain has its issues, whether relatively small or worryingly large. Until recently, L1s were the most abundant blockchain when L2s, application-specific rollups, and modular building blocks popped up and shifted the narrative. Ethereum and Solana are the most popular and most economically secure blockchains, exhibiting a clear difference in developer preference - the EVM versus the SVM. Both of these blockchains exhibit different architectures that have been tailored to fit their specific needs since inception - for Ethereum this was a focus on decentralization while Solana focused on scalability.

每个区块链都有其问题，无论是相对较小还是大得令人担忧。直到最近，当 L2、特定于应用汇总和模块化构建块突然出现并改变了叙事方式时，L1 仍然是最丰富的区块链。以太坊和 Solana 是最受欢迎且经济上最安全的区块链，在开发人员偏好上表现出明显的差异 - EVM 与 SVM。这两个区块链都展示了不同的架构，这些架构自诞生以来就根据其特定需求进行了定制 - 对于以太坊来说，重点是去中心化，而 Solana 则专注于可扩展性。

Each chain offers different experiences derived from their design principles and tradeoffs within the blockchain trilemma. Ethereum has made strides to become more modular through offloading execution to L2s and Solana has seen slight developments around modular infrastructure, but these are still largely referred to as monolithic blockchains. While we often see blockchains attract different user types dependent on their architecture, they aren’t built with a core focus group in mind. The user experience on blockchain A is typically different from blockchain B, but these decisions aren’t at the forefront of blockchain design - the user experience comes afterwards. So, why such a debate over modular versus monolithic, if the competition still clearly favors the latter? What’s the point of designing modular blockchains if it’s so difficult to determine where users will navigate to?

每个链都提供了不同的体验，这些体验源自其设计原则和区块链三难困境中的权衡。以太坊通过将执行下放到 L2，在变得更加模块化方面取得了长足进步，Solana 在模块化基础设施方面也取得了轻微的进展，但这些仍然在很大程度上被称为单片区块链。虽然我们经常看到区块链根据其架构吸引不同的用户类型，但它们在构建时并没有考虑到核心焦点群体。区块链 A 上的用户体验通常与区块链 B 不同，但这些决策并不是区块链设计的最前沿 - 用户体验是后来的。那么，如果竞争仍然明显有利于后者，为什么还要进行关于模块化与整体式的争论呢？如果很难确定用户将导航到哪里，那么设计模块化区块链还有什么意义呢？

Berachain is one of many L1s and L2s slated to launch in 2024. This report aims to highlight differences between modular and monolithic blockchains, examine value accrual within the modular stack, and explain how Berachain’s Protocol Design & PoL (Proof-of-Liquidity) fit into the equation.

Berachain 是计划于 2024 年推出的众多 L1 和 L2 之一。本报告旨在强调模块化和单片式区块链之间的差异，检查模块化堆栈内的价值累积，并解释 Berachain 的协议设计和 PoL（流动性证明）如何契合这个模式。

一些背景信息 (Providing some context)

There are a number of infrastructure categories in the modular stack - data availability layers, shared sequencers, zero-knowledge provers, settlement layers, and more. These four categories work to simplify workflows of a blockchain’s core processes: execution, data availability, settlement and consensus. Modular blockchains began as ideas in research forums, driven by lackluster performance of monolithic L1s and the experimentation that comes naturally with crypto.

模块化堆栈中有许多基础设施类别 - 数据可用性层、共享序列器、零知识证明器、结算层等等。这四个类别致力于简化区块链核心流程的工作流程：执行、数据可用性、结算和共识。模块化区块链最初是研究论坛中的想法，受到整体 L1 表现不佳和加密货币自然而然进行实验的推动。

The first L2s to gather attention were Optimism, Arbitrum, zkSync, and Starknet - all of these EVM-based L2s inherit security from Ethereum mainnet. These L2s utilize either optimistic or zero-knowledge proofs, early examples of modular design finding early product-market within the blockchain architecture battleground. These narratives have changed in recent months, mostly due to the continued development and success of Solana, with monolithic options remaining suitable for everything a user might need on-chain.

第一个引起关注的 L2 是 Optimism、Arbitrum、zkSync 和 Starknet - 所有这些基于 EVM 的 L2 都继承了以太坊主网的安全性。这些 L2 使用乐观证明或零知识证明，这是模块化设计的早期示例，在区块链架构战场中寻找早期产品市场。这些叙述在最近几个月发生了变化，主要是由于 Solana 的持续发展和成功，单一选项仍然适合用户在链上可能需要的一切。

The differences between a modular and monolithic chain revolve around how they manage consensus, execution, settlement, and data availability, though their architectures can vary. A monolithic chain handles all of this in-house, though newly modular chains like Ethereum might eventually outsource DA to Celestia, or offload execution duties to a provider like MegaETH - the beauty of modular infrastructure comes from its ability to be used quite freely.

模块化链和单片链之间的区别在于它们如何管理共识、执行、结算和数据可用性，尽管其架构可能有所不同。单片链在内部处理所有这些，尽管像以太坊这样的新模块化链最终可能会将 DA 外包给 Celestia，或者将执行职责卸载给像 MegaETH 这样的提供商 - 模块化基础设施的美妙之处在于它能够非常自由地使用。

It’s as if Pandora’s Box has been opened and developers are suddenly free to experiment with new architectures, with previous development phases relegating developers to siloed blockchain environments with immutable design principles. With modularity, ideas don’t have to remain in lengthy research or blog posts - the infrastructure to build novel economic systems with strong cryptographic guarantees and superior user experiences is now a reality.

这就好像潘多拉魔盒已经打开，开发人员突然可以自由地尝试新架构，而之前开发阶段将开发人员降级到具有不可变设计原则的孤立区块链环境中。借助模块化，想法不必停留在冗长的研究或博客文章中——构建具有强大加密保证和卓越用户体验的新颖经济系统的基础设施现已成为现实。

The optionality mentioned is obviously a major draw for crypto’s developer base, but users have been left out of this discussion almost entirely. Consumers vote with their wallets, and this is especially true on blockchains, via the frequency of transaction and amount of capital. The average crypto user shouldn’t have to decide between one chain over another due to a minor problem over transaction cost discrepancies, rather the systems should adapt to increasingly heightened user preferences.

提到的可选性显然是加密货币开发者群体的一个主要吸引力，但用户几乎完全被排除在这个讨论之外。消费者用钱包进行投票，在区块链上尤其如此，通过交易频率和资本金额进行投票。普通加密用户不应该因为交易成本差异的小问题而在一条链和另一条链之间做出决定，相反，系统应该适应日益提高的用户偏好。

Modular architectures are increasingly favored for the stack upgradability, should future tech advancements make current options obsolete. Berachain V2’s design will transform the definition of modular infrastructure, creating a system where developers gain access to full EVM equivalence via an ETH2-styled execution environment, along with plug and play consensus featuring sybil resistance mechanisms, currently optimized for PoL and Tendermint consensus.

如果未来的技术进步使当前的选择变得过时，模块化架构因其堆栈可升级性而受到越来越多的青睐。 Berachain V2 的设计将改变模块化基础设施的定义，创建一个系统，开发人员可以通过 ETH2 风格的执行环境访问完整的 EVM 等效性，以及具有女巫抵抗机制的即插即用共识，目前针对 PoL 和 Tendermint 共识进行了优化。

This definition of modularity can also extend to interactions within the Berachain ecosystem, introducing modular liquidity into the vernacular and adding a new dimension of modularity beyond the chain stack.

模块化的这种定义还可以扩展到 Berachain 生态系统内的交互，将模块化流动性引入白话中，并在链堆栈之外添加新的模块化维度。

What if everyone was prioritizing the wrong type of modularity? What if there was a better way of making a blockchain modular, without the need to outsource core protocol functionality?

如果每个人都优先考虑错误类型的模块化怎么办？如果有一种更好的方法来使区块链模块化，而不需要外包核心协议功能怎么办？

Berachain 作为一种新型区块链 (Berachain as a new type of blockchain)

Berachain isn’t exactly a monolithic or modular chain. While it won’t be discussed in depth today, the upcoming Berachain V2 will be implementing modular consensus - a unique structure that builds off of V1’s design to create a more resilient and dynamic blockchain.

Berachain 并不完全是一个整体式或模块化的链。虽然今天不会深入讨论，但即将推出的 Berachain V2 将实施模块化共识——这是一种基于 V1 设计的独特结构，旨在创建更具弹性和动态的区块链。

The aforementioned blockchain roles are all done in-house, with PoL as the major difference. Whether a modular or monolithic blockchain, consensus mechanisms are rarely experimented with to ensure other roles are properly managed.

上述区块链角色都是内部完成的，其中 PoL 是主要区别。无论是模块化区块链还是整体区块链，很少尝试共识机制来确保其他角色得到适当管理。

Berachain seeks to align incentives between user experience and crucial system architects (validators, users and developers), which were ignored in favor of increasingly inconsequential vanity upgrades to marginally boost blockchain performance.

Berachain 寻求协调用户体验和关键系统架构师（验证者、用户和开发人员）之间的激励措施，这些激励措施被忽视，转而支持日益无关紧要的虚荣升级，进而略微提高区块链性能。

As blockspace becomes increasingly commoditized, there is no shortage of chains that can offer cheap transaction costs, high throughput, and extremely competitive time-to-finality. Berachain acknowledged this and saw an opportunity to tackle the more pressing issue of value alignment within the protocol.

随着区块空间变得日益商品化，不乏能够提供廉价交易成本、高吞吐量和极具竞争力的最终确定时间的链。 Berachain 承认这一点，并看到了解决协议内更紧迫的价值一致性问题的机会。

Within Berachain, validators, users and protocols are finally working together toward the incentives and reward framework explicitly built into the blockchain’s architecture. Instead of focusing on outsourcing architecture for marginal technical benefit, Berachain made a blockchain unified via PoL to make liquidity flows and protocol interactions more modular. In DeFi ecosystems on other chains incentives are often isolated. A user can’t farm tokens on one application and then use those assets on a different application to engage in its governance or boost their rewards - on Berachain they can.

在 Berachain 中，验证者、用户和协议最终共同努力，以明确构建到区块链架构中的激励和奖励框架。 Berachain 没有专注于为了边际技术利益而外包的架构，而是通过 PoL 统一了区块链，使流动性流动和协议交互更加模块化。在其他链上的 DeFi 生态系统中，激励措施往往是孤立的。用户不能在一个应用上耕种代币，然后在不同的应用上使用这些资产来参与其治理或提高奖励 - 在 Berachain 上他们可以。

PoL is centered around collaboration and incentive alignment - participants are either a user that’s fighting for their share of BGT (Bera Governance Token), a validator trying to attract more BGT, or a protocol working with peers to boost user rewards and gain a foothold in the market. Berachain’s tri-token model of BGT, BERA and HONEY makes liquidity flows modular within the blockchain. As a short example, users might farm on Kodiak, loop it through Infrared via Kodiak’s vaults, and eventually use the same tokens earned for more power over their assets.

PoL 以协作和激励协调为中心 - 参与者要么是争夺 BGT（Bera 治理代币）份额的用户，要么是试图吸引更多 BGT 的验证者，要么是市场中与同行合作来提高用户奖励并在行业中站稳脚跟的协议。 Berachain 的 BGT、BERA 和 HONEY 三代币模型使区块链内的流动性流动模块化。举个简单的例子，用户可以在 Kodiak 上进行耕作，并经由 Infrared 来循环(使用)Kodiak 的金库，并最终使用获得的相同代币来获得对其资产的更多权力。

Prior to Berachain, this was not possible on any blockchain. Even previous examples of protocol synergies within ecosystems have been somewhat isolated as DeFi has revolved around liquidity mining, an act that involves the deliberate farming of an individual protocol’s unique governance token.

在 Berachain 之前，这在任何区块链上都是不可能的。即使是之前生态系统内的协议协同效应的例子也有些孤立，因为 DeFi 一直围绕着流动性挖矿，这种行为涉及对单个协议的独特治理代币的刻意耕作。

协调每个参与方 (Aligning every actor)

Within the PoL system there are three distinct participants: validators, users and dApps. To create symbiosis, BGT weaves these moving parts together to allow the chain to scale liquidity and economic security simultaneously. Modular blockchains are defined relating to architecture and the fragmentation of the stack; modular liquidity can be used to describe a system where the roles of users on a chain are no longer isolated.

PoL 系统内存在三个不同的参与者：验证者、用户和 dApp。为了创造共生关系，BGT 将这些活动部件编织在一起，使该链能够同时扩展流动性和经济安全性。模块化区块链的定义与架构和堆栈的碎片有关；模块化流动性可以用来描述链上用户角色不再孤立的系统。

Development on Berachain stands out as a new approach, one where developers and users are aligned from the beginning. Creating applications on Berachain requires an understanding of PoL-driven incentive mechanisms, while users are aware of the stark difference in transacting on Berachain versus any other blockchain. Validators directly interact with users and communicate their desire for BGT. Protocols combine forces with competitors to bring themselves and their users greater BGT rewards. There’s no longer a zero-sum competition between ecosystem actors, extending these benefits to everyone interacting on-chain in some way.

Berachain 上的开发是一种脱颖而出的新方法，开发人员和用户从一开始就保持一致。在 Berachain 上创建应用需要了解 PoL 驱动的激励机制，同时用户也意识到在 Berachain 上进行交易与任何其他区块链上的明显差异。验证者直接与用户交互并传达他们对 BGT 的渴望。协议与竞争对手联合起来，为自己及其用户带来更大的 BGT 奖励。生态系统参与者之间不再存在零和竞争，将这些好处扩展到以某种方式在链上互动的每个人。

Where modular architectures might align developers across different ecosystems, modular liquidity aligns all participants across a single ecosystem. The protocols deployed on modular blockchains are no different from those on monolithic, meaning the primary user advantage only comes from the ability to transact at lower costs and gain marginally faster transaction finality. This system doesn’t prioritize innovation or novel economic games, rather design principles that exhibit the same lack of attention toward user experience and what drives someone to transact on-chain. Over time, these advantages become commoditized, meaning that creating user value elsewhere becomes even more important. Modular liquidity - like what’s possible on Berachain - creates that value for users.

模块化架构可以使不同生态系统中的开发人员保持一致，而模块化流动性可以使单个生态系统中的所有参与者保持一致。部署在模块化区块链上的协议与单一区块链上的协议没有什么不同，这意味着主要的用户优势仅来自于以更低的成本进行交易并获得更快的交易最终性的能力。该系统并不优先考虑创新或​​新颖的经济游戏，而是优先考虑设计原则——这些原则同样缺乏对用户体验以及驱使人们进行链上交易的关注。随着时间的推移，这些优势变得商品化，这意味着在其他地方创造用户价值变得更加重要。 模块化流动性——就像 Berachain 上可能实现的那样——为用户创造了价值。

Berachain makes liquidity liquid.

Berachain 使流动性流通。

Berachain’s tokenomics make its blockchain experience inherently user-centric, thanks to the split functionality of its gas token (BERA) and governance token (BGT). Berachain is an example of an economic system where preferences are modular, but cohesive, a system where on-chain interactions are familiar but less taxing on the user. With liquidity able to flow between moving parts, there’s less focus needed on making the overarching blockchain architecture modular. As a result, the symbiosis between BERA and BGT helps grow Berachain’s utility for users and make it more secure in the process.

由于其 Gas 代币 (BERA) 和治理代币 (BGT) 的拆分功能，Berachain 的代币经济学使其区块链体验本质上以用户为中心。 Berachain 是一个经济系统的例子，其中偏好是模块化的，但具有凝聚力，链上交互是熟悉的，但对用户来说负担较小。由于流动性能够在移动部件之间流动，因此无需过多关注使总体区块链架构模块化。因此，BERA 和 BGT 之间的共生有助于提高 Berachain 对用户的实用性，并使其在此过程中更加安全。

If you’d like to learn more about how PoL and BGT might work in the wild, you can read this report.

如果您想了解有关 PoL 和 BGT 实际如何工作的更多信息，您可以阅读此报告。

原文链接 Original link：https://blog.berachain.com/blog/to-be-or-not-to-be-modularity-thoughts-on-blockchain-architectures-and-how-berachain-fits-in