Mysten Labs, which has successfully established Sui Network and DeepBook Protocol in the market, is preparing a new initiative. It's called the Walrus Protocol.
While there are already many protocols in the decentralized storage market, Walrus is gaining attention because 1) it is much more cost-effective and secure than existing storage solutions, and 2) it enables stored data to be programmable through the Sui Network.
As Walrus is being evaluated as the most advanced project among existing decentralized storage protocols, its utility and value will be very noteworthy going forward.
Mysten Labs, having successfully launched the Sui Network and Deepbook protocol, is now venturing into a new territory with Walrus. The success of Sui Network and Deepbook has generated considerable anticipation for Walrus. However, despite this enthusiasm, there are also concerns surrounding the Walrus protocol.
These concerns stem from several factors: the market is already saturated with decentralized storage solutions, many of which aren't performing optimally, and there's worry about resource allocation - specifically whether Mysten Labs, which needs to continue developing and growing the Sui Network, might be spreading its resources too thin by pursuing new initiatives.
Therefore, we will examine the structure of the Walrus protocol and explore how it differs from existing decentralized storage solutions. We will then analyze the relationship between Walrus and the Sui network, focusing on how Walrus integrates with Sui's architecture and enhances the broader Sui ecosystem.
To address why Walrus needs to exist, we must first discuss how it differs from existing decentralized distributed storage solutions. From my perspective, there are three major distinctions between Walrus and existing storage models (particularly focusing on Filecoin and Arweave), which can be summarized as follows:
1.1.1 Efficiency in Storage Costs
First, there are significant differences in storage costs between Walrus, Arweave, and Filecoin. As previously covered in the Wallus article written by Four Pillars, Arweave uses a system that provides incentives to nodes that replicate and store as much data as possible while Filecoin allows users to determine how many nodes will store their data (users can choose to store data with just one miner or distribute 100 copies across 100 different miners. Naturally, the more miners requested to store the data, the higher the cost).
In contrast, Walrus, which uses Reed-Stuff Encoding, demonstrates remarkably lower costs and up to 100 times greater efficiency compared to Arweave and Filecoin (When compared to Arweave, which requires network-wide data storage resulting in up to 500 times higher replication costs, Walrus maintains efficiency with only 4-5 times replication). Simultaneously, the probability of data loss is significantly lower.
In simple terms, Walrus addresses the disadvantages of both Arweave and Filecoin. While Arweave has a low probability of data loss but high replication costs, and Filecoin offers relatively affordable storage based on user needs but risks higher data loss with lower cost options, Walrus combines the advantages of both by maintaining low replication costs while minimizing the probability of data loss.
Furthermore, with Arweave, Additionally, in Arweave's case, as the number of nodes increases, costs increase (though not linearly) because it encourages all nodes/designated nodes to store as much of the complete data as possible. In contrast, Walrus only requires one network data transmission, with each node storing partial data, which actually reduces the burden on individual nodes as the network grows. This structural difference makes Walrus's storage costs significantly more efficient than both Arweave and Filecoin.
1.1.2 Programmability
While Walrus's efficiency compared to Arweave and Filecoin is important, its most distinctive feature from existing storage models is "Programmability." Traditional storage has been merely a simple data repository, but Walrus achieves programmable decentralized storage through the Sui Network, which enables functionality beyond basic data storage.
What if smart contracts could directly reference or trigger data stored in decentralized storage? For example, when minting NFTs, image files can be stored in Walrus and their blob data objects can be created on the Sui Network, connecting them with NFT objects. This addresses the criticism of traditional NFTs being "incomplete" (where tokens are on-chain but NFT art metadata is stored off-chain), allowing NFTs through Walrus to become true Web3 assets.
For another example directly related to data storage, since Walrus blobs can be stored as Sui objects and controlled through Sui's Move smart contracts, smart contracts can transfer stored data to other users or automatically change ownership. This is why we say data in Walrus is programmable.
In contrast, Arweave and Filecoin have limited or practically impossible dynamic integration with on-chain applications. While Filecoin has added some smart contract functionality through FVM (Filecoin Virtual Machine), data modification and control capabilities remain limited, making Walrus significantly superior in terms of programmability.
1.1.3 Data Access and Deletion
Existing storage protocols had a characteristic where once data was uploaded, it could be accessed by anyone and could not be deleted. While this feature might be useful for individual users, it posed significant limitations for institutions and businesses that need to store sensitive data or require the ability to modify/delete their data. In contrast, Walrus allows users to dispose of or modify their data when desired (this is quite different from Arweave, where data cannot be deleted or modified at all, and Filecoin, where data deletion occurs not because users want it but rather when contracts expire or when nodes hosting user data go down and no longer exist in the network).
Some might worry this conflicts with blockchain's fundamental principle of immutability, but it's important to remember that what's being deleted in Walrus is only blob data. Independent of blob data deletion, transaction data maintains its immutability, and deleting blob data doesn't affect blockchain integrity.
With this enhanced practicality compared to traditional storage, Walrus has increased potential for adoption by both traditional and Web2 businesses, leading to high expectations for its versatility going forward.
If we've examined how Walrus differs from existing storage protocols, let's now explore the relationship between Walrus and the Sui Network. When Mysten Labs announced their preparation of the Walrus protocol, many viewed it critically, questioning, "Shouldn't they be focusing solely on Sui instead of creating another protocol?" However, with even a basic understanding of how Walrus operates, it becomes clear that Walrus isn't diverting attention from Sui, but rather should be viewed as a storage stack built to complete applications on Sui. In other words, Walrus not only complements Sui Network from a storage perspective but also positively impacts $SUI, Sui Network's governance token, making it impossible to view these two separately. Let's examine this in more detail.
1.2.1 The Symbiotic Relationship Between Sui and Walrus
In fact, Mysten Labs had significant concerns about maintaining and managing storage even during Sui's initial design phase. This was because blockchains inevitably grow in state as they are used more, which could ultimately lead to increased transaction fees for future Sui Network users. Therefore, from Sui's early design stages, Mysten Labs introduced the unique concept of storage funds to address Sui's storage challenges.
The translation maintains the technical accuracy while preserving the original tone and structure of the Korean text. I've kept technical terms like "storage funds" and "$SUI" in their original form as they are standard industry terminology.
Here's how the Sui storage fund operates: Fees submitted by users to Sui validators are divided into 1) gas fees related to computation and 2) storage costs for data storage. Sui collects storage costs upfront from users for permanent data storage and pools these funds in the Storage Fund. The Storage Fund continuously redistributes the accumulated amount to validators while data remains stored on-chain. Additionally, users can receive a refund of their storage costs if they delete their data.
Sui's unique on-chain data storage system creates two effects:
Users can receive storage cost rebates when deleting on-chain data, creating an economic incentive to reduce distributed ledger capacity.
The system solves storage-related sustainability issues through a unique incentive structure that pre-collects storage fees and allocates them as incentives for future validators.
While Sui aimed to solve sustainability issues through this unique structure, storing large blob data (such as media files) on-chain remained burdensome. This is where Walrus comes in - by storing large blob data through Walrus while objectifying the blob's metadata on Sui for control, data can be made programmable without directly storing it on Sui.
Furthermore, through Sui, Walrus achieves its most distinctive feature compared to other storage protocols by making stored data programmable and controllable. Ultimately, Sui and Walrus have a symbiotic relationship where they create unique advantages and complement each other's limitations.
1.2.2 Walrus Makes $SUI a Deflationary Asset
As seen in the storage fund example, the Sui Network requires a certain amount of Sui tokens to be paid as storage costs for storing any object. Walrus is no exception. When creating blob data objects in Walrus, Sui tokens proportional to the object's size(I am refering to object representing the blob, not the actual size of the blob here) are locked up in the storage fund.
While some portion can be refunded upon data deletion, part of the fees creates a burning effect by permanently removing tokens from circulation. In other words, the more data stored through Walrus, the more Sui tokens are permanently locked in the storage fund, creating a virtuous cycle where increased Walrus usage leads to decreased Sui supply.
To summarize, Walrus's emergence is positive news for the Sui Network from both a network and asset perspective, and it's expected that the Sui ecosystem will develop in more diverse directions through Walrus.
The translation maintains the technical precision while preserving the interconnected narrative between Walrus and Sui, particularly emphasizing the economic aspects and their mutually beneficial relationship.
When Mysten Labs was first established, I thought it was simply a company focused on the Sui Network. However, after witnessing the launch of services like Deepbook and Sui Naming Service, I found myself pondering what vision Mysten Labs was pursuing. When I encountered Walrus, I concluded that their goal was to build a complete decentralized infrastructure for Web3.
Mysten Labs has a different time horizon in viewing this industry compared to other companies. They're not simply issuing tokens, creating hype, and selling off; instead, they have a vision to lead innovation in all areas - execution, storage, consensus, and communication - while understanding the inertia of users accustomed to Web2 services and building the most suitable UI for them.
Execution and consensus are handled by the Sui Network (which continues to evolve through initiatives like Mysticeti and Pilotfish & Remora), storage by Walrus, communication by SCION (a next-generation internet architecture capable of protecting network packets, known for DDoS prevention and immunity to routing attacks - note that SCION wasn't created by Mysten Labs but is mentioned because it will be applied across the Sui Network), and Web2-familiar UI is managed by zkLogin, Stashed, SEAL, and KELP.
If all these initiatives successfully take root, I believe Mysten Labs can rewrite the existing Web3 paradigm. My initial thinking was limited. Mysten Labs wasn't just trying to build a blockchain - they were a team building the infrastructure for a new web. Of course, I believe Sui is at the center of Mysten Labs' vision, with other initiatives all playing complementary roles. The same goes for Walrus, and in my view, Walrus might be the most important protocol among them.
However, Walrus is not confined to the Sui ecosystem. Like other storage protocols, Walrus can be used by any third party beyond Sui applications, and it could potentially serve as a useful alternative to existing storage protocols or even other DA layers (Celestia, EigenDA, Avail).
This usability of Walrus expands Sui token demand beyond the Sui Network. When Walrus is used, objects are created on the Sui Network, leading to a decrease in Sui supply. In other words, Walrus has the potential to make Sui tokens a more attractive asset by creating external demand (this is not investment advice, but rather a structurally possible scenario). Therefore, Walrus is expected to act as a bridge that expands Sui in various directions.
While comparing the value between specific protocols is a delicate matter, I am very optimistic about Walrus's future because: 1) its operational mechanism is far more efficient than existing storage protocols, 2) it can perform tasks that existing storage protocols couldn't (becoming DA or making stored data programmable), and 3) it already has a solid network and user base through the Sui Network which it can leverage.
If Walrus becomes not just a storage layer for the Sui Network but a representative storage protocol for Web3, as envisioned by Mysten Labs, it could become the leading protocol in the storage sector.
Related Articles, News, Tweets etc. :
Sui
Nillion
FLock.io
