While state-of-the-art permissioned blockchains can achieve thousands of transactions per second on commodity hardware with x86/64 architecture, their performance when running on different architectures is not clear. The goal of this work is to characterize the performance and cost of permissioned blockchains on different hardware systems, which is important as diverse application domains are adopting t. To this end, we conduct extensive cost and performance evaluation of two permissioned blockchains, namely Hyperledger Fabric and ConsenSys Quorum, on five different types of hardware covering both x86/64 and ARM architecture, as well as, both cloud and edge computing. The hardware nodes include servers with Intel Xeon CPU, servers with ARM-based Amazon Graviton CPU, and edge devices with ARM-based CPU. Our results reveal a diverse profile of the two blockchains across different settings, demonstrating the impact of hardware choices on the overall performance and cost. We find that Graviton servers outperform Xeon servers in many settings, due to their powerful CPU and high memory bandwidth. Edge devices with ARM architecture, on the other hand, exhibit low performance. When comparing the cloud with the edge, we show that the cost of the latter is much smaller in the long run if manpower cost is not considered.
翻译:虽然最先进的允许区块链可以实现每秒有x86/64建筑的商品硬件成千上万次交易,但在不同建筑上运行时,其性能并不明确。 这项工作的目的是确定不同硬件系统中允许区块链的性能和成本,因为不同的应用领域正在采用t。 为此,我们对两个允许区块,即超升式Fabric和ConsenSyms Quorum, 进行广泛的成本和绩效评估,涉及五种不同类型的硬件,涵盖x86/64和ARM建筑以及云层和边缘计算。 硬件节点包括英特尔Xeon CPU服务器、以ARM为基础的Amazon Graviton CPU服务器和以ARM CPU为基础的边端装置。 我们的结果显示,两个区链链在不同环境上的情况各不相同,显示了硬件选择对总体性能和成本的影响。 我们发现, Gravitton服务器在许多环境中超越Xeon服务器, 原因是其强大的CPU和高记忆带宽。 当我们把磁带的功能与高档比起来时, Edge 设备在另一部显示的是, 低成本。