The discussion about increasing blob throughput in Pectra has intensified, with two camps emerging: one supporting increased throughput, and the other more cautious, preferring to wait for more definitive data to support the change.
In my opinion, the sentiment in the community has become very clear: independent stakers are at the heart of Ethereum.
While there is no consensus on the minimum validator requirements, the Ethereum community has made it clear that we are not willing to sacrifice independent/family stakers for linear scaling.
In my opinion, this reflects a healthy direction for Ethereum and highlights the community’s commitment to the viability of independent staking.
However, this also raises an important question: "Where is the line?"
Specifically, at what point is the role of low-bandwidth, weaker contributing stakers in decentralization no longer sufficient to offset their limitations on the capabilities of Ethereum’s scaling suite?
In this article, I hope to provide a few more data points to help the community make a more informed decision about whether to pursue increased blob throughput in Pectra.
As Prysm core developer Potuz1 said, the real question is not "Should we expand the package, how to expand the package", but "Are we ready to expand the package now?"
1. Who is undergoing restructuring? (October 2023 – October 2024)
On average, about 0.2% of blocks are reorged (reorged blocks are part of the leaked blocks). Professional node operators (NO) like Lido, Kiln, Figment, and EtherFi are reorged less frequently than average.
Less specialized node operators, such as independent stakers, Rocketpool operators, and unidentifiable categories (which may include a large number of unidentifiable independent stakers), experience reorganizations more frequently.
As shown in the previous analysis1, the reorganization rate has been trending downward since the Dencun hard fork.
In the image below, we can see how this effect varies between entities:
The reorganization rate for independent stakers and unidentified nodes has decreased since Dencun.
Rocketpool operators and larger operators like Lido, Coinbase, Figment and OKX also saw a similar reduction in reorganization rates.
2. What is the status of block construction in this region? (October 2023 – October 2024)
The recombination rate of local builders is about 1.02%.
The recombination rate of MEV-Boost builders is about 0.20%.
Native builders are approximately five times more likely to experience a reorganization than MEV-Boost builders.
The proportion of local block builders reorganized seems to have remained the same or even increased after the Dencun hard fork.
As for MEV-Boost users, the recombination rate has been on a downward trend since Dencun.
It is worth noting that previous analysis showed that local builders included more blobs in their blocks on average. In addition, we also observed that after the Dencun hard fork, blocks containing 6 blobs faced some challenges for a while, but eventually stabilized. This may explain why the reorg rate of local builders has not decreased.
Who are the local builders? (October 2023 – October 2024)
Independent stakers (labeled here as “independent stakers,” but many of them fall into unidentified categories) are the largest entities in the “local builders” category.
Additionally, there are some Lido node operators that do not use MEV-Boost at all, or use the lowest bid flag.
Key Insights
Independent stakers are more likely to miss out on slots than professional validators.
Independent stakers often choose to build blocks locally rather than using MEV-Boost.
Local block builders cannot enjoy the fast propagation advantages provided by MEV-Boost relays.
Relays may employ timing strategies (e.g., relay delays to allow time for more profitable blocks).
Epoch boundaries lead to an increase in recombination.
A variety of factors can cause reorganizations, so it is difficult to determine exactly why some validators (such as independent stakers) experience reorganizations more often than others.
