Sui Reveals What Caused Three Mainnet Halts After Major Network Upgrade

bitcoinistPublicado a 2026-06-02Actualizado a 2026-06-02

Resumen

The Sui mainnet experienced three outages on May 28 and 29 following its 1.72 network upgrade. The first two halts, on Thursday and Friday morning, were caused by a bug in the new hybrid gas charging logic for address balances. A transaction cancellation due to insufficient funds could later trigger an underflow during the gas settlement process. A temporary patch was applied, but a masked error caused a repeat halt Friday morning. The third outage Friday afternoon was a separate issue triggered by a scheduled epoch change. A bug prevented validators from properly persisting the failed status of a randomness generation protocol, stalling the transition. All issues have been resolved with no risk to user funds, and network activity has resumed. The Sui Foundation cited lessons around improving epoch resilience and the critical nature of gas charging logic.

Sui’s mainnet suffered three separate outages across May 28 and May 29 after the network’s 1.72 release exposed edge cases in gas charging and validator restart logic, according to a postmortem from the Sui Foundation. The foundation said the issues have since been resolved, network activity has resumed, and “no user funds were at risk.”

The incidents began on Thursday, May 28, when Sui’s mainnet halted at around 7 a.m. PT and remained down until roughly 1:30 p.m. PT. A second outage followed on Friday morning, starting at about 5 a.m. PT and ending around 8:30 a.m. PT. The third halt began Friday afternoon at approximately 1:30 p.m. PT and was resolved around 7:20 p.m. PT.

According to the foundation, the first two outages stemmed from crash bugs involving the interaction between gas charging logic and Sui’s 1.72 upgrade, which introduced address balances. The third outage was separate, triggered during a scheduled epoch change after validator restarts exposed a latent bug in how randomness state was preserved.

“During the outages, no user funds were at risk, and the network did not revert any committed transactions when it resumed,” the Sui Foundation said. “As of now, validators have fully addressed the known issues caused by both the original gas-charging bug and the randomness-state bug, and network activity has resumed.”

Sui Gas Charging Bug Triggered Initial Halts

The first problem centered on Sui’s new address balance feature, which allows users to store funds and pay for gas without relying solely on coin objects. Transactions on Sui can pay gas through address balances, coin objects, or a hybrid structure combining both.

The edge case emerged in that hybrid gas path. When a transaction attempted to spend from an address balance that could not cover competing transactions, the scheduler correctly cancelled it with an InsufficientFundsForWithdraw error. But later, during gas smashing — the process of combining input coins into a single gas-paying coin — the same reservation could still attempt to debit funds again.

In the foundation’s explanation, the crash did not occur directly during gas smashing but during settlement, when balance deltas were reconciled by a system transaction. A negative delta applied to a zero balance caused an underflow.

The immediate fix was conceptually straightforward: avoid gas smashing when a transaction is cancelled with InsufficientFundsForWithdraw. Validators adopted that fix on Thursday, bringing the network back online. But the foundation acknowledged that the patch was an interim measure, chosen to restore the network while engineers developed a more complete solution.

“Changing gas logic is a delicate operation,” the foundation wrote. “As explained above, there are complicated interactions between address balances and coins. Other than fixing bugs, gas logic changes must preserve all previous behavior or use appropriate version gating.”

That interim patch contained a known weakness. If a transaction had multiple cancellation reasons, another error could mask the InsufficientFundsForWithdraw condition. When that happened Friday morning, the original underflow path could still be reached, causing a second halt.

Epoch Change Exposed Randomness-State Bug

The third outage came after the network had resumed normal operation Friday morning. At the next scheduled epoch change, validators failed to complete the transition because of a bug tied to Sui’s distributed key generation protocol, or DKG, which bootstraps randomness for transactions that depend on on-chain randomness.

During the earlier restart cycle, participation was not high enough for the next epoch’s DKG process, so randomness was disabled as designed. The problem was that the failure verdict was not written to disk. As validators restarted again, they came back up without remembering that DKG had failed.

“With validators no longer remembering DKG had failed, neither could happen, the paused queue grew, and end-of-epoch logic — which must drain that queue before closing — was left waiting on DKG that would never come,” the foundation said.

The fix had two parts: persisting DKG status across restarts and adding a mechanism that allowed validators to close the stuck epoch at a coordinated point. That mechanism was used once to close the affected epoch, after which the network moved into the next epoch and randomness was restored.

The postmortem framed the outages as a broader engineering lesson for Sui. The foundation said end-of-epoch resilience needs further investment, particularly around graceful degradation and operational force-close mechanisms. It also said gas charging deserves the same level of rigor as the Move VM or Mysticeti consensus, given its interaction with settlement, conservation checks, and scheduling.

At press time, SUI traded at $0.8798.

Sui remains below the 20-week EMA, 1-week chart | Source: SUIUSDT on TradingView.com

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat were the root causes of the three mainnet halts experienced by Sui?

AThe first two outages were caused by crash bugs involving the interaction between the new address balance feature in the 1.72 upgrade and gas charging logic. The third outage was caused by a latent bug related to how randomness state was preserved during validator restarts, which was exposed during a scheduled epoch change.

QAccording to the postmortem, were any user funds at risk during the network outages?

ANo. The Sui Foundation stated that during the outages, no user funds were at risk, and the network did not revert any committed transactions when it resumed.

QWhat specific condition triggered the gas-charging bug that led to the first two halts?

AThe bug was triggered in a hybrid gas payment scenario. When a transaction attempted to spend from an address balance that could not cover competing transactions, it was cancelled. Later, during the 'gas smashing' process, the system incorrectly tried to debit funds from the same cancelled reservation again, leading to an underflow error during settlement.

QWhat was the key issue with the Distributed Key Generation (DKG) protocol that caused the third outage?

ADuring validator restarts, the failure verdict of a DKG process (which was disabled due to low participation) was not written to disk. When validators restarted again, they had no memory of the DKG failure. This caused the end-of-epoch logic to wait indefinitely for a DKG process that would never complete, stalling the epoch transition.

QWhat broader engineering lessons did the Sui Foundation highlight from these incidents?

AThe foundation highlighted two main areas for improvement: 1) Enhancing end-of-epoch resilience with better graceful degradation and operational force-close mechanisms. 2) Applying the same level of engineering rigor to gas charging logic as is applied to the Move VM or consensus, due to its complex interactions with settlement, conservation checks, and scheduling.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Ten-Thousand-Word Analysis: From $10 to $290, MRVL Wins the Entire AI Era by 'Not Making GPUs'

Marvell Technology's stock price surged from under $10 in 2016 to a record $290 in June 2026, fueled not by making GPUs, but by dominating AI infrastructure connectivity. This analysis argues the market misvalues MRVL as merely a smaller Broadcom in custom AI chips, overlooking its true, unique position. Marvell's core strength lies in enabling high-speed data flow for AI clusters through three interconnected businesses. First, it holds a commanding ~70% market share in high-speed optical DSPs (essential for data center light modules), a deep-moat business with accelerating growth. Second, its custom AI chip design business serves hyperscalers like AWS, Microsoft, and Google, with a significant revenue pipeline despite lower margins. Third, stable cash flows come from Ethernet switch chips and enterprise storage controllers. Together, they form a full-stack "AI data movement" platform. CEO Matt Murphy's transformative leadership since 2016, involving strategic divestments, key acquisitions (like Inphi for optical DSPs), and securing long-term agreements with major cloud providers, repositioned the company. A pivotal $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA in 2026 underscored Marvell's critical role in the AI ecosystem, particularly through collaborations like NVLink Fusion. While Marvell faces risks—including client concentration (losing the Amazon Trainium3 design), lower-margin business mix, competitive threats, insider selling, and complex supply chains—its fundamentals remain strong. The optical interconnect moat is widening with the acquisition of Celestial AI (photonics fabric), and financial metrics show accelerating revenue growth and operating leverage. With a PEG ratio suggesting undervaluation relative to its growth, the thesis is that the market undervalues Marvell's monopolistic position in AI "plumbing" while overemphasizing its competitive custom chip segment. The story transcends investing, symbolizing how in any complex system—from the internet to AI—the value of "connection" ultimately surpasses that of individual "nodes."

marsbitHace 15 min(s)

Ten-Thousand-Word Analysis: From $10 to $290, MRVL Wins the Entire AI Era by 'Not Making GPUs'

marsbitHace 15 min(s)

AI Relay Stations Spark Heated Debate on Zhihu: Behind Cheap Tokens, What Are Users Really Worried About?

A discussion on Zhihu about "AI relay stations" shifted the niche developer topic of "cheap tokens" into broader user awareness. Users moved beyond simply questioning the legitimacy of these services to focus on practical concerns: Where do cheap tokens truly come from? Is the model being accessed the real one? Can relay stations see prompts, code, and API keys? For occasional users, are the risks worth it? The core debate centered less on price and more on trust. A primary worry is model authenticity—the risk of "model swapping," where users paying for a premium model might be routed to a cheaper one, creating an information asymmetry. Others argued that cost comparisons matter; while cheaper than official pay-as-you-go APIs, relay stations may not be the lowest-cost option versus subscriptions, domestic models, or free tiers, making user needs assessment crucial. Speculation about token sources ranged from legitimate bulk discounts to gray-area methods like account sharing or exploiting regional pricing. This opacity makes risk assessment difficult for users. Data security emerged as a critical concern, especially for enterprise use. When processing sensitive information like code, contracts, or client data, the inability to verify a relay station's data handling, retention, or access policies poses significant compliance and confidentiality risks. The evolving consensus suggests relay stations can be used cautiously for low-sensitivity, disposable tasks (e.g., summarizing public info, simple translation). However, they should not be the default for sensitive, professional, or production workflows involving proprietary data, Agents, or automated systems. Recommendations include avoiding large prepayments, not relying on a single service, using test prompts to monitor quality, anonymizing data where possible, and keeping official channels as backups. Ultimately, the discussion framed tokens not just as a billing unit but as a measure of real cost encompassing price, model integrity, data security, and service stability. The popularity of relay stations highlights user demand for affordable access, but the debate underscores a key trade-off: the savings from cheap tokens may come at the price of trust, transparency, and control over one's data and AI experience.

marsbitHace 44 min(s)

AI Relay Stations Spark Heated Debate on Zhihu: Behind Cheap Tokens, What Are Users Really Worried About?

marsbitHace 44 min(s)

In-Depth Research Report on TradFi: The Convergence Wave of Crypto and Traditional Finance

In 2026, the crypto industry is undergoing a profound infrastructure-level transformation—TradFi assets are migrating on-chain at an unprecedented pace. According to CoinGecko's Q1 2026 report, the total value locked (TVL) of tokenized real-world assets (RWA) has surpassed $31 billion, a nearly 4x increase from $7.8 billion at the beginning of 2025, with the sector’s aggregate market capitalization reaching $19.3 billion. Among these, the market cap of tokenized stocks surged from $2 million to $486 million, with Q1 spot trading volume reaching $15.1 billion—a single quarter already surpassing the entire second half of 2025. RWA perpetual contract Q1 trading volume reached a staggering $524.8 billion, far exceeding the $313 billion for all of 2025. Meanwhile, BlackRock's BUIDL fund has reached $2.3 billion in scale and has filed for two new tokenized funds, signaling that the world's largest asset manager's tokenization strategy is evolving from pilot to product suite expansion. HTX, as a core participant in the crypto exchange sector, officially launched TradFi perpetual futures products including NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, META, and SPY in 2026, enabling crypto users to gain 24/7 trading access to core U.S. equities. Boston Consulting Group predicts that global tokenized asset scale could reach $16 trillion by 2030, while McKinsey offers a conservative estimate of approximately $2 trillion. The on-chain migration of TradFi assets is no longer a "future narrative" but a structural transformation unfolding in real time, as crypto exchanges evolve from single crypto asset trading platforms toward "multi-asset-class trading infrastructure."

HTX LearnHace 47 min(s)

In-Depth Research Report on TradFi: The Convergence Wave of Crypto and Traditional Finance

HTX LearnHace 47 min(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros

Artículos destacados

Cómo comprar SUI

¡Bienvenido a HTX.com! Hemos hecho que comprar SUI Network (SUI) sea simple y conveniente. Sigue nuestra guía paso a paso para iniciar tu viaje de criptos.Paso 1: crea tu cuenta HTXUtiliza tu correo electrónico o número de teléfono para registrarte y obtener una cuenta gratuita en HTX. Experimenta un proceso de registro sin complicaciones y desbloquea todas las funciones.Obtener mi cuentaPaso 2: ve a Comprar cripto y elige tu método de pagoTarjeta de crédito/débito: usa tu Visa o Mastercard para comprar SUI Network (SUI) al instante.Saldo: utiliza fondos del saldo de tu cuenta HTX para tradear sin problemas.Terceros: hemos agregado métodos de pago populares como Google Pay y Apple Pay para mejorar la comodidad.P2P: tradear directamente con otros usuarios en HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): ofrecemos servicios personalizados y tipos de cambio competitivos para los traders.Paso 3: guarda tu SUI Network (SUI)Después de comprar tu SUI Network (SUI), guárdalo en tu cuenta HTX. Alternativamente, puedes enviarlo a otro lugar mediante transferencia blockchain o utilizarlo para tradear otras criptomonedas.Paso 4: tradear SUI Network (SUI)Tradear fácilmente con SUI Network (SUI) en HTX's mercado spot. Simplemente accede a tu cuenta, selecciona tu par de trading, ejecuta tus trades y monitorea en tiempo real. Ofrecemos una experiencia fácil de usar tanto para principiantes como para traders experimentados.

483 Vistas totalesPublicado en 2024.12.12Actualizado en 2026.06.02

Cómo comprar SUI

Discusiones

Bienvenido a la comunidad de HTX. Aquí puedes mantenerte informado sobre los últimos desarrollos de la plataforma y acceder a análisis profesionales del mercado. A continuación se presentan las opiniones de los usuarios sobre el precio de SUI (SUI).

活动图片