hey, Moonriver and Moonbeam are built by the same team. Moonriver is a canary network on Kusama, Moonbeam is a parachain on Polkadot. although they share many parts of their code, Moonbeam and Moonriver are independent, standalone networks with different priorities. Moonriver is wild and fast: great for bold experimentation and early-stage deployment. Moonbeam is more conservative. all the new code that the Moonbeam contributors writes first goes through Moonriver, and after some tests / experiments, this code will be implemented on Moonbeam. many things, such as governance / staking / XCM / runtime and much more, are important to check and test in real economic conditions, it seems that the logic of kusama and parachains is something like a novel, which does not yet exist in other existing blockchains
Is it true that after Polkadot 2.0 is launched MOVR will lose its functionality as fast etc? People in another group were saying things like that
the block time for Moonriver is the same as for Moonbeam. however, when we discuss "speed", we're not referring to finality, latency, and such factors. It's more about how new features will be implemented first on Moonriver, allowing devs and the community to engage with them earlier. for example, upgrades like Polkadot 2.0 will first be rolled out on Kusama and its parachains, and only after successful testing will the upgrade be applied to Polkadot and its parachains. Moonriver also offers more agility in governance matters, such as voting, I believe the lock-up period there will be shorter. also, staking rewards are distributed every 2 hours on Moonriver, compared to every 6 hours on Moonbeam, because a round on Moonriver is 600 blocks, as opposed to 1800 blocks on Moonbeam. the unstaking time is also shorter on Moonriver - 2 days, vs 7 days for Moonbeam
Обсуждают сегодня