REVIEW 2 cited by
Groundhog: Linearly-Scalable Smart Contracting via Commutative Transaction Semantics
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Groundhog is a novel design for a smart contract execution engine based around concurrent execution of blocks of transactions. Unlike prior work, transactions within a block in Groundhog are not ordered relative to one another. Instead, our key design insights are first, to design a set of commutative semantics that lets the Groundhog runtime deterministically resolve concurrent accesses to shared data. Second, some storage accesses (such as withdrawing money from an account) conflict irresolvably; Groundhog therefore enforces validity constraints on persistent storage accesses via a reserve-commit process. These two ideas give Groundhog a set of semantics that, while not as powerful as traditional sequential semantics, are flexible enough to implement a wide variety of important applications, and are strictly more powerful than the semantics used in some production blockchains today. Unlike prior smart contract systems, transactions throughput never suffers from contention between transactions. Using 96 CPU cores, Groundhog can process more than half a million payment transactions per second, whether between 10M accounts or just 2.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Remora: Scale-out Deterministic Execution for Smart Contracts
Remora scales deterministic smart-contract execution inside a single validator to ~250k TPS via asymmetric dispatch, object versioning with leases, and pre-consensus stateless work plus subgraph scheduling.
-
FastSet: Parallel Claim Settlement
A protocol that settles arbitrary weakly independent claims in parallel, proving that every validator converges to the same state without any validator-to-validator communication.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.