We tested two blockchain platforms, EOS and Ledgable, to potentially store internal Icury off-chain transactions within the Icecat ecosystem, and got some interesting outcomes. Below, is the comparison table from the outcomes of our two tech pilots.
Though both blockchain systems have their pros and cons, EOS is relatively less favourable because of the very low speed in TPS (transactions per second) compared to Ledgable, and thus not any better than the Ethereum platform. Data missing can be very problematic as the data is not stored in multiple chains: the risk is real that data might be lost forever if a chain crashes. One other big issue for EOS is that the node needs to be restarted each time after a system change or update (or randomly sometimes) as it stops responding. In some cases we needed to use the hard-replay-blockchain option, which is very time consuming and ineffective in long run. The most fundamental and critical drawback of EOS is that private data is not stored fully privately, but in the public blockchain. Some data is just too sensitive to be dependent on the functioning of a bunch of open source hackers like EOS’s.
According to our pilot, EOS can not be used to store private database transactions, and EOS cannot replace Ethereum tokens any time soon as the stability of the environment is not beyond any doubt.
Possible scenarios to be tested in our next pilot:
Read further: ICURY, Research, blockchain, cryptocurrencies, Icecat, icury
The EOS Mainnet runs 5000 Tx/s on a global network. We EOS Amsterdam do not recognize these results.
It depends of course on the configuration. In a high capacity configuration 5000 tps is still not a lot. In the financial market the typical benchmark is millions of tps.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *