Research on L2 solution

Since the Ethereum gas price gets higher and higher. It is essential to accelerate the process of the MCDEX L2 solution. I am going to research the L2 or rollup candidate solutions. I call on the community to help me and provide suggestions.

I will research the solutions in the following aspects:

  • Decentralization: How much does this solution decrease the level of decentralization?
  • Cross-Chain: How do the assets be crossed to the L2 solution/side-chain?
  • Performance: How many tx/s will MCDEX get based on this solution?
  • Scalability: Does this solution has scalability? How does it scale up/out?
  • Gas cost: How much does single tx costs? Is the gas fee static or dynamic(based on some congestion indicator)?
  • QoS: Is it a multi-tenant or single-tenant system? If it is multi-tenant, is there any QoS that MCDEX could get some promised resources?
  • Migration: Is it easy to migrate MCDEX to this solution? How does the L2 solution cooperate with the current L1 system?

This is the good direction to point @jie!

I suggest you to start with this article by Alex from Matter Labs

It gives you a framework to compare the various solution we actually have on Ethereum

Feel free to comment, so we can start a discussion!

1 Like

Thanks @emilianobonassi! It does help a lot!

1 Like

We find this is useful:

Most of the popular dapps seems to be leaning towards optimistic rollup. Did you look into They also submitted a proposal for scaling reddit.

1 Like

I would like to recommend Loopring-zkRollup they are live on Main net with.

The end of the article states that many if not all of the development challenges have been addressed.

I suggest @jie also to read the latest article from Matter Labs, team and Alex are quite good

Optimistic rollup is a good choice if you want to scale faster, most of the solutions (e.g. Optimism ex plasma) doesn’t require to migrate/re-design your smart contracts (i.e. Synthetix L2 trial few months ago)

Anyway, real scaling today is done via global setup Snark (e.g. Loopring) or Stark (e.g. Deversify). This is difficult because today only few use-cases are mappable easily (and efficiently) to zk-circuits but this is in the long run a good solution. You get for free also privacy which is not available on optimistic solution (or is implemented from scratch)

Thanks. I read it. I think the key for those zk-based method is to provide generic smart-contract support.

1 Like

After going through those L2 solutions, I found that Optimistic rollup and zkRollup are two candidates. From a DApp developer’s aspect, Optimistic Rollup tries to provide OVM while zkRollup has a new programing language. It costs the Dapp developer much time to rewrite its project in a new programming language. However, as a team made up of engineers and considering the advantages of zkRollup, I think the cost is acceptable.

The key to winning this competition is delivering the main net as early as possible. If one of the solutions had been entirely ready, we would start to develop based on it right now.


Here is some more info about Loopring. They are running a DEX with zk on the main net, here is the design docs which might help explain, and see any challenges.

and you can find the Loopringv3 beta DEX here.

Hopefully these will help.

Deversifi alo use ZKRollup, similar to Loopring - both are order book based exchange, moving on and off the exchange cost gas, so make sense too do large/frequent trades. Also, withdraw takes long time (Deverisifi 1nd half hour, Loopring longer).

Glad to hear Liu.

I see we are aligned and I like your long-term mindset!

What about to create a task-force for this challenge and work together?

For ZK, I can connect with the Loopring guys and the Matter Labs team which developed a framework Zinc that enables to write smart contracts Solidity-like using a language close to Rust.

In addition, we could engage the Optimism team to evaluate a PoC.

1 Like

The Syscoin Ethereum offers a L2 Solution that has already been embraced by Binance for their BUSD token and may be useful for you to look at in terms of zdag-scalability, merged-mined bitcoin security and negligible fees you can calucate on the Syscoin website:
I am a Syscoin community member and more knowledgeable folks would certainly be happy to answer more detailed questions!

we have connections with Matter Labs & Loopring. However, that’s so nice of you help us connect with the Optimism team to evaluate a PoC.

I’ve been working on L2 technology for a long time. Many people have asked me which solution is better and which solution MCDEX will use later. I think each of these solutions has its own advantages and disadvantages. But for mcdex V3, the most important thing is the interactivity and composability of the protocol, and what’s more, the release time. Therefore, the conclusion is very simple, MCDEX v3 will use the L2 solution that Uniswap uses.

1 Like

Uniswap will be using Optimism (see

Launch partners include:

1 Like

Yes. So will mcdex. :grin:


well , Optimism is best choice now

When can we expect L2 testnet and mainnet for MCDEX? Is the L2 still Optimism?

Has the team considered other blockchains instead of L2? For example, Avalanche?

There’s lots of competition in the decentralized exchange space - how is MCDEX going to differentiate itself from others (e.g. dydx, Futureswap, Serum, Switcheo etc…)

We will launch v3 on Arbitrum testnet on Feb.

All those competitors in this field have their thoughts on products. And MCDEX v3 has two keys:

  • Permissionless
  • High capital-efficient AMM