Mulai Belajar

Skalabilitas Tanpa Layer-2: Filosofi Monolitik Solana

Mengapa Solana memilih menyelesaikan skalabilitas di Layer-1 tanpa memerlukan Layer-2

📅 10 Oct 2025

🌍 Dilema Skalabilitas Blockchain

Blockchain menghadapi trilemma klasik:

Scalability (Skalabilitas)
     /    \
    /      \
Security  Decentralization
(Keamanan) (Desentralisasi)

Masalahnya: Sulit untuk mencapai ketiganya sekaligus.

Solusi tradisional:

🛤️ Dua Jalan Berbeda

Ketika blockchain lain mencari solusi dengan membangun Layer-2 (seperti Optimism, zkSync, Arbitrum), Solana memilih jalur yang berbeda:

Menyelesaikan masalah skalabilitas langsung di Layer-1.

Layer-2 Approach (Ethereum):

Layer-1 (Base Chain)
    ↓ (settlement)
Layer-2 (Rollups)
    ↓ (execution)
User Applications

Kelebihan:

Kekurangan:

Monolithic Approach (Solana):

Layer-1 (All-in-One)
    ↓
User Applications (direct)

Pendekatan ini disebut monolithic architecture — di mana semua aktivitas (transaksi, smart contract, NFT, DeFi, game, dll) terjadi di satu rantai utama tanpa perlu jembatan atau shard tambahan.

🚀 Keuntungan Desain Monolitik

1. Kesederhanaan Interaksi dApp

Single Global State:

Semua dApp di Solana hidup dalam “lingkungan global” yang sama.

Contoh:

NFT Marketplace ←→ DeFi Protocol
        ↕
   Wallet ←→ Staking Pool
        ↕
    Gaming dApp

Keuntungan:

Real-world use case:

2. Kecepatan dan Konsistensi

Cross-chain problems (L2s):

Action on L2 → Wait → Bridge to L1 → Wait → Settle
(Minutes to hours)

Solana monolithic:

Action → Instant confirmation → Done
(< 1 second)

Keuntungan:

Contoh: User dapat:

  1. Swap token di Jupiter
  2. Use proceeds to mint NFT
  3. List NFT on marketplace
  4. All in under 2 seconds!

3. Biaya Super Murah

Why costs stay low:

L2 solutions:

L1 fees: High ($5-$50)
L2 fees: Lower ($0.10-$2)
Bridge fees: Additional ($5-$20)
Total user cost: Still significant

Solana L1:

Base transaction: $0.00025
No bridge needed: $0
No L2 fees: $0
Total: $0.00025

Cost comparison:

4. Unified Liquidity

L2 fragmentation problem:

Uniswap on Ethereum: $2B liquidity
Uniswap on Arbitrum: $500M liquidity
Uniswap on Optimism: $300M liquidity
→ Fragmented, inefficient

Solana single-layer:

Jupiter on Solana: $1.5B liquidity
All in one place
→ Deep liquidity, better prices

Dampak:

5. Simplified Developer Experience

Multi-layer complexity:

// Ethereum + L2
const provider = new ethers.providers.Web3Provider(window.ethereum);
const l2Provider = new optimism.providers.Provider(L2_RPC);
const bridge = new Bridge(L1_ADDRESS, L2_ADDRESS);

// Deploy on L1
await contract.deploy(l1Provider);

// Bridge assets
await bridge.deposit(amount);
await wait(minutes);

// Deploy on L2
await contract.deploy(l2Provider);

// Setup cross-chain messaging
await setupMessaging();

Solana single-layer:

// Solana
const connection = new Connection(SOLANA_RPC);
const wallet = new Wallet();

// Deploy anywhere, works everywhere
const program = await Program.deploy(connection);

// Done!

Developer benefits:

🏗️ How Solana Achieves Monolithic Scale

The question: How does Solana handle L1 scaling without compromising?

Key Innovations:

1. Proof of History (PoH)

2. Sealevel (Parallel Runtime)

3. Turbine (Block Propagation)

4. Gulf Stream (Mempool)

5. Pipelining (Transaction Processing)

6. Cloudbreak (Horizontal Database)

Architecture Comparison:

Traditional Blockchain:

Sequential Processing
Single-threaded execution
Limited by consensus coordination
Result: 15-50 TPS

Ethereum + L2s:

L1: Security & settlement (15-50 TPS)
L2s: Execution (1,000-10,000 TPS each)
Result: Scalable but fragmented

Solana Monolithic:

Parallel Processing
PoH + Sealevel optimization
All on L1
Result: 65,000+ TPS unified

⚖️ Trade-offs & Considerations

Desain monolitik bukan tanpa kompromi:

Challenges:

1. Hardware Requirements

Validator specs:

Trade-off:

Mitigation:

2. State Growth

Masalah:

Solutions:

Progress:

3. Network Complexity

Challenge:

Reality:

🎯 Why Monolithic Works for Solana

Philosophy: “Build it Right the First Time”

Solana’s bet:

Optimize L1 properly
    ↓
Scale natively
    ↓
No need for L2 complexity

Ethereum’s approach:

Keep L1 simple & conservative
    ↓
Scale via L2s
    ↓
Accept fragmentation trade-off

Neither is “wrong” — different philosophies

When Monolithic Wins:

✅ Terbaik for:

Examples:

When L2s Make Sense:

✅ Better for:

📊 Performance Comparison

Metric Ethereum L1 Eth + L2s Solana L1
TPS 15-30 1,000-10,000 65,000+
Block Time 12s Varies 400ms
Finality 15min Minutes 13s
Cost $1-$50 $0.10-$2 $0.00025
Composability Native Limited Native
Liquidity Unified Fragmented Unified
UX Complexity Simple Complex Simple

🔮 Future: Scaling Further

Even monolithic chains need to scale:

Upcoming Improvements:

1. Firedancer Client

2. QUIC Protocol

3. Fee Markets

4. State Compression v2

💡 Philosophical Question

Kenapa membuat Layer-2 kalau Layer-1 bisa dioptimalkan dengan benar?

Solana’s answer:

The bet:

2020: Solana seems "over-engineered"
2025: Validator hardware is commodity
2030: Solana L1 > any multi-layer solution?

Time will tell, but so far, the bet is paying off.

🎓 Kesimpulan

Filosofi Solana sederhana:

“Kenapa membuat Layer-2 kalau Layer-1 bisa dioptimalkan dengan benar?”

Keuntungan monolitik:

Trade-offs:

Hasil akhir?

Pengalaman blockchain yang terasa seperti Web2 — cepat, stabil, dan intuitif — tanpa mengorbankan desentralisasi atau keamanan Web3.

Monolithic architecture bukan untuk semua chain, tapi untuk Solana? It’s the perfect fit. 🚀

📚 Baca Juga

Technical Resources:

Artikel ini dibuat dengan riset mendalam & fact-checked. Untuk pertanyaan atau feedback, hubungi kami di ruangsolana@gmail.com atau Twitter.