Polygon 联创「出走单干」,一览 Avail 的数据可用性愿景

长文源:foresightnewsPubblicato 2023-10-29Pubblicato ultima volta 2023-11-06

Introduzione

Avail 采用轻客户端、数据可用性采样、KZG 承诺和纠删码等技术构建数据可用性解决方案。

Avail 是专注于数据可用性层的模块化区块链,采用轻客户端、数据可用性采样、KZG 承诺和纠删码等技术构建数据可用性解决方案。


撰文:angelilu,Foresight News

 

Polygon 最初于 2017 年由三位联合创始人共同创立,但今年 3 月联创之一 Anurag Arjun 却宣布离职,称将带领其团队全身心投入到了另一个新项目上。

 

那个新项目就是Avail,Polygon 像一个巨大的 Layer2 聚合器,多年来其团队在内部探索了多种扩容方向,2020 年就在内部启动了对模块化区块链项目 Avail 的研究,或许是 Polygon 要聚焦于自身发展,又或许是 Avail 有足够大的潜力,从今年 3 月起,Avail 就从 Polygon 分拆了出来,作为独立实体运营。

 

从分拆至今,Avail 在 6 月开启了为期三个月的 Kate 测试网,推出了「数据证明桥」,并与 Equilibrium Group 合作开源了 Optimism EVM(OpEVM)软件开发工具包(SDK)新原型,Avail 称 Kate 测试网有望在 10 月结束,接下来最重要的进展就是将推出激励测试网,而主网上线的时间预计为 2023 年第四季度或 2024 年第一季度。

 

Avail 和单体区块链的区别

 

那么能让 Polygon 联创 Anurag Arjun 选择「出走单干」的 Avail 到底是什么呢?又到底有何用途呢?

 

说到底,Avail 还是在解决像以太坊这样的单体区块链的扩容问题,最初可能是叫 L3 又或者是链下扩展解决方案或其他,但现在 Avail 找到了更适合的定语— 模块化区块链。

 

区块链技术的核心组件包括共识层 / 执行层、结算层和数据可用性层,在像以太坊和 Solana 这样的传统单体区块链架构中,所有这些任务都是由单个系统独立完成的,所以扩容性能有限。而模块化区块链的设计思路是将这些核心功能拆分为多个模块,每个模块都可以由专门的提供商来执行,从而实现更高的定制性和扩展性。

 


专注于数据可用性层的模块化区块链

 

而 Avail 就是仅专注于数据可用性层(Data Availability Layer)的提供商。

 

Avail 可对交易进行高效的排序和记录,提供对数据的存储和数据可行性的验证,支持与以太坊虚拟机(EVM)兼容的区块链,允许 Rollup 将数据直接发布到 Avail,且其轻客户端网络验证机制(下文将介绍)使得 Avail 上的 Rollup 可以通过轻客户端网络而无需依赖智能合约和基础层来验证状态。并且由于其模块化性质,开发人可在 Avail 存储数据并选择其他网络进行结算。

 

 


Avail 的设计

 

和以太坊等其他团队试图提高现有区块链中的数据可用性能力不同,Avail 正在从头开始构建可扩展的数据可用性解决方案,下文将从共识机制、去中心化、有效性证明等几个方面探析 Avail 的设计。

 

共识机制

 

不同的区块链在平衡活跃性和安全性后会根据需要选择不同的安全机制,Avail 选择「中庸之道」,使用继承自 Polkadot SDK 的 BABE 和 GRANDPA 共识机制,BABE 充当区块生产引擎,并通过与验证节点协调来识别新的区块生产者来优先考虑活跃性。 GRANDPA 充当最终性小工具,一旦超过三分之二的验证者证明包含该块的链,它就可以同时最终确定通向特定块的所有块,这种混合机制为 Avail 提供了网络弹性,使其能够承受临时网络分区和大量节点故障。

 

去中心化

 

在去中心化上,Avail 采用 Polkadot 的提名权益证明(NPoS),支持多达 1000 个验证节点,NPoS 还具有有效的奖励分配可以降低权益中心化的风险。

 

此外,Avail 的节点功能设置为其提供了特有的故障安全机制。单体区块链的网络架构由验证节点、全节点和轻客户端组成,这三者可视为分别扮演工匠、质检员和消费者的角色,而 Avail 将全节点的质检员权利给到了轻客户端,轻客户端使用数据可用性采样(DAS)方法进行验证,数据可用性采样是轻客户端用来请求每个块的小型随机部分的过程,有能力实现与传统全节点同等的安全保证。在 Avail 的设计中,全节点仍存在但它们几乎被视为备份工具,以维持网络上数据的高冗余,该设计使得 Avail 在网络中断或瓶颈时无需依赖全节点获取数据,从而防止全节点串谋的风险。

 

有效性证明

 

提到模块化,不得不提到近期因推出代币热度高涨的 Celestia,Avail 和 Celestia 之间还闹过一个小乌龙。2021 年 6 月 Polygon 刚部署 Avail时,Celestia 联合创始人 Mustafa Al-Bassam 发文称,Avail 的介绍几乎逐字复制了他 2019 年写的介绍 Celestia 的博客,撇开抄袭不谈,欢迎更多的团队进入数据可用性领域。对此,Polygon 联合创始人 MihailoBjelic 表示,由于营销和内容团队的失误,对 Celestia 及其社区表示歉意。

 

尽管两者在数据可用性层面有许多相似之处,但 Avail 与 Celestia 在有效性证明上不同,Avail 采用 KZG 多项式承诺(KZG commitments) ,可减少内存、带宽和存储需求并提供简洁性,KZG 承诺与 Avail 轻客户端的结合加快了 Avail 上的验证过程。而 Celestia 使用欺诈证明技术,比 KZG 承诺生成快得多。但由于其采样数据的规模较大,因此需要的通信带宽略高。

 

Avail 的 KZG 多项式承诺是指区块生产者在生产区块时生成的承诺,汇总 Avail 区块的整行中的数据,在验证阶段由轻客户端查看区块头中的承诺,并根据承诺验证每个单元的证明,即可确认块中所有数据的可用性,以此来提高链上的数据吞吐量,解决性能瓶颈。

 

小结

 

总的来说,虽然 Avail 距离主网上线还有一段时间,但其作为一个模块化的数据可用性解决方案,给区块链技术的发展提供了新的思考和探索方向。目前越来越多的行业参与者面临着由于区块空间有限而成本高昂的增长挑战,未来这个挑战也将越来越严峻,可扩容的数据可用性层对于有效扩展区块链至关重要,开发人员选择在哪里构建项目也将决定他们未来几年是否具有竞争优势。

Letture associate

Bitcoin's 'Rally Ends,' Officially Entering the Later Stage of a Bear Market?

Bitcoin prices declined 13% this week, reversing the recent rebound and signaling a likely transition into the later stages of a bear market. Key on-chain metrics deteriorated, with the short-term holder cost basis falling below the Realized Price—a pattern last seen in early 2022, characteristic of bear market maturity. The rally to ~$82k proved to be a bear market bounce, as evidenced by the 90-day realized profit/loss ratio failing to sustain above the bullish threshold of 2. Daily realized losses surged to $1.35B, including significant selling from long-term holders who accumulated near cycle tops, indicating ongoing supply redistribution. Price was rejected almost precisely at the aggregate US spot ETF cost basis of ~$83k, turning that level into resistance and leaving the average ETF investor underwater again. Spot market selling pressure intensified, with the 7-day volume delta turning significantly negative to its weakest level since February. While a major long liquidation event cleared over $400M in leverage, spot demand has not yet stepped in to absorb the resulting supply. Options markets continue pricing in higher future volatility (elevated volatility risk premium) and maintain a skew toward put options, reflecting persistent demand for downside protection, though not yet panic. Overall, market structure remains fragile. Sustained recovery likely requires a reclaim of the ETF cost basis, a shift back to positive spot demand, and a slowdown in realized loss-taking. Until then, the market risks further downside or extended consolidation within the broader bear trend.

Foresight News42 min fa

Bitcoin's 'Rally Ends,' Officially Entering the Later Stage of a Bear Market?

Foresight News42 min fa

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Summary: This article explores the perceived "death spiral" risk between MicroStrategy (MSTR), its Bitcoin holdings, and its perpetual preferred stock (STRC), drawing comparisons to the LUNA-UST collapse. While both systems feature price anchors, high yields for holders, and potential feedback loops, their core mechanisms differ fundamentally. The MSTR-STRC structure relies on continuous financing to sustain its high dividend payouts, primarily through stock ATM offerings. A negative feedback cycle could occur: falling MSTR stock price makes raising equity capital harder, increasing pressure to sell Bitcoin, which undermines STRC confidence and further depresses MSTR. However, unlike LUNA-UST's automated, direct linkage, the MSTR-STRC loop is weaker and has brakes: STRC dividends can be deferred or rates lowered, and STRC holders have a $100/share liquidation preference in bankruptcy, providing a price floor. The company's sustainability hinges on its ability to continue financing. Its current ~$900 million USD reserves cover only about 6.3 months of its ~$1.71 billion annual interest/dividend burden. The next six months are critical, aligning with both the potential bottom in Bitcoin's four-year cycle and the depletion timeline of its reserves. While a LUNA-style catastrophic collapse is deemed highly unlikely due to structural differences, the key question is whether MicroStrategy can navigate this period through healthy deleveraging to restart its capital engine.

Foresight News1 h fa

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Foresight News1 h fa

How Much Debt Does Strategy Really Have? Is There a Risk of Implosion?

MicroStrategy's Debt Risk: A Turning Point in the "Never Sell" Strategy As of June 3, 2026, MicroStrategy holds 843,706 bitcoins (valued at ~$53.1B) but faces significant financial obligations. Its capital structure includes $6.75B in convertible notes and $15.48B in perpetual preferred stock (led by the $8.5B STRC series), creating an annual payout burden of ~$1.71B. With software revenue at only ~$500M, interest and dividend obligations far exceed operating income. A critical shift occurred in late May 2026 when the company sold 32 bitcoins for ~$2.5M to cover dividends, breaking CEO Michael Saylor's long-standing "never sell" pledge. This symbolic move triggered a sharp decline in both Bitcoin's price and MSTR stock, reflecting market fears about cash flow sustainability. The core of the strain is the STRC perpetual preferred stock, designed as a "permanent loan" with no maturity date but requiring high monthly dividends (currently 11.5%). Its business model relies on a three-part cycle: issuing new STRC shares, using proceeds to buy more Bitcoin and fund a USD reserve, and using that reserve to pay dividends. This cycle depends on continuous investor demand for STRC and Bitcoin's price appreciation. Analysis shows Bitcoin needs to appreciate at least 2.3% annually to cover the $1.71B in yearly obligations at current holdings. With Bitcoin price down ~22% from March 2026 highs, this pressure has intensified. The company's $900M USD reserve can only cover about 7 months of payments if STRC issuance stalls. Key risks are not immediate bankruptcy or forced Bitcoin liquidation (as BTC is not collateral), but rather: 1) The erosion of MSTR's premium to its Bitcoin holdings (mNAV), which would cripple its ability to raise cheap capital; 2) A vicious cycle where stagnant Bitcoin prices reduce STRC demand, draining the USD reserve and forcing BTC sales, further depressing prices. The period from February 2027 to September 2028 is a crucial test, with over $5.9B in convertible notes facing put options or maturity. In essence, MicroStrategy has evolved from a simple Bitcoin holder into a complex financial entity acting like a "private Bitcoin bank," leveraging its BTC holdings to create layered financial products. Its survival depends on maintaining Bitcoin's price trend, its stock premium, and market appetite for its preferred shares. The recent token sale marks not a betrayal of its Bitcoin thesis, but an admission that the leveraged strategy must eventually be paid for.

marsbit1 h fa

How Much Debt Does Strategy Really Have? Is There a Risk of Implosion?

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片