What significant advantages does BFT provide over On-chain POW solutions and why or why not are they not more commonly used?
asked May 11, 2018 at 15:52
-
Hi there. Is this a general blockchain question, or does it have some specific relation to Ethereum?– Richard HorrocksCommented May 11, 2018 at 18:39
-
@RichardHorrocks It was mentioned on the documentation of Casper FFG– Vignesh KarthikeyanCommented May 11, 2018 at 20:39
-
@VigneshKarthikeyan If my answer is sufficient then please accept it and close the question, otherwise, are there other points of clarification that I can help with?– CJ JacobsCommented May 13, 2018 at 9:20
-
I'm looking for more depth in the answer. What causes these differences?– Vignesh KarthikeyanCommented May 13, 2018 at 18:01
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
Answers can be found in Ethereum's official Q&A on Proof of Stake under the How does proof of stake fit into traditional Byzantine fault tolerance research? section.
Proof of work algorithms and chain-based proof of stake algorithms choose availability over consistency, but BFT-style consensus algorithms lean more toward consistency; Tendermint chooses consistency explicitly, and Casper uses a hybrid model that prefers availability but provides as much consistency as possible and makes both on-chain applications and clients aware of how strong the consistency guarantee is at any given time.
