The rapid growth of the Solana ecosystem has ignited a crucial debate: should it remain a monolithic chain or embrace a more modular future with Layer-2s and app-specific chains? This discussion, sparked by prominent builders like the founder of DRiP, centers on scalability, economic control, and the long-term vision for the network.
Understanding the Core Issue: Congestion and Economic Pressures
Solana's recent surge in activity, driven by airdrops, memecoin trading, and booming DeFi, has highlighted both its strengths and weaknesses. While the network handles an impressive 1-000-2,000 TPS—outpacing all EVM chains combined—this success has come with challenges.
High network congestion has led to:
- Increased transaction latency
- Higher failure rates for transactions
- Rising costs due to priority fees
For an application like DRiP, which distributes millions of NFTs to thousands of wallets weekly, this congestion translates to real economic loss—reportedly around $20,000 weekly. Such applications benefit little from Solana's composability but bear the full brunt of its infrastructure costs during peak periods.
This has led developers to privately discuss the need for scaling solutions that offer:
- Increased transaction throughput
- Reduced competition for block space
- Lower and more predictable fees
- Greater control over their economic value
Solana's Current Approach to Scaling
The Solana Foundation and core developers like Anza have focused on optimizing the base layer through:
- Implementation of priority fees
- Optimized Compute Unit (CU) usage
- Stake-weighted QoS
- A new transaction scheduler in v1.18
These improvements help, but they represent vertical scaling (making the single chain more efficient) rather than horizontal scaling (adding multiple execution layers). While valuable, they cannot alone address the fundamental tension between applications that need composability and those that need dedicated throughput.
The upcoming separation of the Solana Virtual Machine (SVM) from the validator client represents a significant architectural shift that will make SVM forks and custom implementations considerably easier to create and operate.
The Case for Solana Appchains
Appchains are essentially forks of the Solana codebase customized for specific applications. They offer dedicated block space and full control over the chain's economic and governance model.
Notable examples and potential use cases include:
- Pythnet: The first major SVM appchain, handling 10-20% of all Solana transactions at its peak. It migrated to avoid mainnet congestion while maintaining Solana's 400ms block time for high-frequency price updates.
- Perpetual DEXs: Trading platforms could operate as independent L1s with customized block parameters and integrated conditional logic (like stop-loss orders executed at the L1 level).
- AI and DePIN: Projects like Grass (a DePIN project for AI data) require massive throughput that may be better suited to dedicated chains.
- Governance Chains: As explored by MakerDAO, dedicated governance chains could provide better coordination mechanisms for complex DAOs.
- Gaming and Casino Applications: These often benefit from customized economics and throughput requirements.
The key challenge for appchains is maintaining interoperability. A native messaging framework similar to Avalanche Warp Messaging or Cosmos IBC would be crucial for connecting these chains while preserving ecosystem cohesion.
👉 Explore advanced scaling solutions
The Emerging Landscape of Solana Layer-2s and Rollups
Unlike Ethereum's top-down approach to L2 scaling, Solana's rollup movement is driven by application developers seeking better user experience and economic control.
Current implementations include:
- GetCode: A payments application using a pseudo-rollup structure with a sequencer that batches transactions before settling on Solana. This provides instant, private payments even during mainnet congestion.
- MagicBlocks' Ephemeral Rollups: Designed for gaming, these temporary rollups offer dedicated throughput for specific sessions while maintaining connection to the main Solana ecosystem.
Upcoming rollups show diverse approaches:
- Grass: Plans to use ZK proofs for its massive data operations (1M+ network requests per second), settling proofs on Solana mainnet.
- Zeta Markets: A perpetual DEX exploring moving its matching engine off-chain to a rollup for improved user experience.
These implementations reflect a trend toward "RollApps" (application-specific rollups) rather than general-purpose L2s. Most will abstract away the complexity from end-users, who may not even realize they're using a rollup.
Economic Alignment: The SOL Value Question
A crucial consideration in Solana's scaling debate is economic alignment. Ethereum's L2 ecosystem has strengthened ETH's monetary properties through its use as the primary asset across multiple layers.
Similarly, Solana solutions that enhance SOL's utility and demand could benefit the entire ecosystem. Potential mechanisms include:
- Using SOL as the primary gas token on L2s
- SOL restaking for shared security
- SOL-denominated fees and economic activity
Applications considering their own chains must weigh the benefits of value capture against the challenges of fragmentation and reduced composability.
Infrastructure Requirements for a Modular Solana
A robust ecosystem of Solana L2s and appchains would require significant infrastructure development:
- Rollup-as-a-Service Providers: Companies like Caldera could expand to offer SVM-based rollup solutions.
- Shared Sequencers: Projects like Rome Protocol could provide sequencing services that enable cross-rollup arbitrage and MEV capture.
- Enhanced Wallet Support: Wallets like Phantom and Backpack would need to support seamless interactions across multiple layers.
- Bridging Solutions: Secure and efficient bridges would be essential for moving assets between layers.
- Oracle Services: Reliable data feeds from providers like Pyth and Switchboard would need to span the entire ecosystem.
Strategic Considerations for Application Builders
The decision between staying on Solana mainnet versus moving to an appchain or rollup involves multiple factors:
Stay on Mainnet If:
- Your application benefits significantly from composability with other protocols
- You're in early stages without massive scaling needs
- You value ecosystem liquidity and user accessibility
Consider Appchain/Rollup If:
- You need dedicated block space and predictable costs
- Your application has specific customization needs (privacy, fee markets, etc.)
- You've reached "escape velocity" with sufficient users and transaction volume
- Value capture is a significant priority
Most applications will likely start on mainnet and only consider moving to dedicated execution environments when their specific needs justify the additional complexity.
Frequently Asked Questions
What's the difference between a Solana appchain and a rollup?
Appchains are independent chains that fork the Solana codebase and maintain their own consensus, while rollups publish transaction data to Solana and inherit its security. Appchains offer more sovereignty but less security; rollups provide more security but less customization.
Will moving to L2s or appchains harm Solana's composability?
It will change composability patterns rather than eliminate them. Applications that require tight integration will likely remain on mainnet, while those needing dedicated throughput may migrate. Cross-chain communication protocols will enable composability across different layers.
How soon will we see functional Solana L2s?
Several projects are already operational in testnet or limited mainnet phases. Broader adoption will likely follow as infrastructure matures and more applications reach scaling limits on mainnet.
Does Solana have an official stance on L2s?
The core development teams remain focused on optimizing base layer performance. The L2/appchain movement is primarily developer-driven rather than part of an official foundation roadmap.
Can Firedancer solve Solana's scaling issues without L2s?
While Firedancer promises significant performance improvements, it represents vertical scaling. Horizontal scaling through L2s and appchains addresses different needs: dedicated block space and economic sovereignty rather than just raw throughput.
How will users interact with Solana L2s?
The goal is seamless abstraction. Users likely won't need to know they're using an L2—wallets will handle cross-layer interactions automatically, similar to how GetCode's users experience instant payments without understanding the underlying rollup structure.
Conclusion: A Hybrid Future for Solana
Solana doesn't face an either-or choice between monolithic and modular architectures. The network is evolving toward a hybrid model where:
- The base layer handles the most value-sensitive transactions requiring maximum composability
- Application-specific chains and rollups provide dedicated throughput for specialized use cases
- Infrastructure matures to connect these layers seamlessly
This approach acknowledges that no single chain can optimally serve all use cases at global scale. Solana's mainnet will likely remain the heart of the ecosystem for applications that benefit from its low-latency composability, while specialized applications will find homes in tailored environments.
The question isn't whether Solana needs L2s and appchains, but rather how the ecosystem will evolve to integrate these solutions while maintaining the user experience and developer flexibility that made Solana successful in the first place. The answer will determine whether Solana can truly scale to meet global demand while preserving what makes it unique.