What is the difference between polkadot and kusama?
Although they share much of the same code, Polkadot and Kusama are independent networks with different priorities.
Kusama is difficult to control and fast, ideal for daring experiments and early-stage use. Polkadot is more cautious, prioritizing stability and reliability.
The common point of the two networks
Kusama was released as the first version of the same code used in Polkadot, meaning they share the same basic architecture: a multi-chain, heterogeneous shard design based on the Nominee Proof of Stake (NPoS). Both networks also share important innovations such as on-chain governance, changeable runtimes for fork-free on-chain upgrades and cross-chain messaging (XCMP) for interoperability.
Governance at both Polkadot and Kusama is decentralized and without permission, explaining how the revolution will be carried out for all native token holders (DOT for Polkadot, KSM for Kusama). Therefore, networks will grow, converge, or diverge independently over time, depending on the decisions of their respective communities.
Other main points
There are some key differences as follows:
| Speckle | Kusama | |
| advantage | High stability | Fewer barriers to getting started with parachain implementation |
| High security | Fewer link requirements for validators and parachain | |
| Manage and update more carefully | Low penalties for sudden inactivity | |
| Higher validation bonuses | Fast iteration | |
| Latest technology | ||
| use cases | Business applications and B2B | Startup network in the early stages |
| Finance app | Test new ideas | |
| High quality applications that require security such as banking, stability and robustness | The application does not require security like a bank and is powerful | |
| Upgrades for early-stage apps dụng | Pre-production environment for Polkadot |
speed
The first major technical difference between Polkadot and Kusama is that Kusama changed the administrative parameters to allow for faster upgrades. Kusama is four times faster than Polkadot, where token holders vote for the referendums in just 7 days, then the issuing time is 8 days and the referendum is issued on-chain. This means that stakeholders need to stay active and vigilant if they want to stay up to date on all of Kusama’s suggestions, surveys, upgrades, and validators, typically in a single announcement.
At Polkadot, voting takes 28 days, followed by a 28-day enactment period. This does not mean that the Kusama blockchain itself is faster, the block times or the transaction throughput are faster (these factors are the same on both networks), but there is a shorter interval between governance events, such as upgrades. This enabled Kusama to adapt and grow faster than polkadot.
Lean setup
Teams that want to run Parachain need to link tokens for security reasons. The link requirements on Kusama will likely be lower than on Polkadot.
When used
Polkadot will and will remain the primary network for the delivery of enterprise-class and high-quality, transaction-intensive applications that require bank-grade security and stability. The first use case for Kusama is a preproduction environment – the “Canary Network”. Building on Kusama, teams can first test everything in a live, fully decentralized, community-controlled network with real-world conditions and lower stakes in the event of a crash or outage compared to Polkadot.
Many projects will have parachains in both networks and will test and test new technologies and features on Kusama before deploying them in Polkadot. Some groups will choose to just stay in Kusama. Interesting experiments with new technologies could take place here in the future. Projects that require high throughput but don’t necessarily require security like banking, such as some gaming, social networking, and content distribution applications, are particularly good candidates for school.
Kusama could also prove to be the perfect environment for ambitious experimentation with new ideas and innovations in areas such as governance, incentives, monetary policy and DAOs (non-autonomous organizations). Future upgrades to the Polkadot runtime will likely also be implemented on Kusama prior to the Polkadot mainnet. This way, not only can we see how new technologies and features work in real-life conditions before we bring them to Polkadot, but the teams that have deployed on both networks also get a preview of how their own technology will follow up on these upgrades becomes .
Conclude
In short, Kusama and Polkadot will exist as independent networks with their own additional community, governance, and use cases, although they will continue to have a close relationship with many groups having the ability to deploy applications on both networks. In the future, we may also see Kusama connected to Polkadot for interoperability with multiple networks. The Web3 Foundation remains committed to both of them in the future, providing critical support and guidance to the teams building the ecosystem.
Minh Anh
According to Polkadot Network
Follow the Youtube Channel | Subscribe to telegram channel | Follow the Facebook page
Author
Blockchain
What is the difference between polkadot and kusama?
Although they share much of the same code, Polkadot and Kusama are independent networks with different priorities.
Kusama is difficult to control and fast, ideal for daring experiments and early-stage use. Polkadot is more cautious, prioritizing stability and reliability.
The common point of the two networks
Kusama was released as the first version of the same code used in Polkadot, meaning they share the same basic architecture: a multi-chain, heterogeneous shard design based on the Nominee Proof of Stake (NPoS). Both networks also share important innovations such as on-chain governance, changeable runtimes for fork-free on-chain upgrades and cross-chain messaging (XCMP) for interoperability.
Governance at both Polkadot and Kusama is decentralized and without permission, explaining how the revolution will be carried out for all native token holders (DOT for Polkadot, KSM for Kusama). Therefore, networks will grow, converge, or diverge independently over time, depending on the decisions of their respective communities.
Other main points
There are some key differences as follows:
| Speckle | Kusama | |
| advantage | High stability | Fewer barriers to getting started with parachain implementation |
| High security | Fewer link requirements for validators and parachain | |
| Manage and update more carefully | Low penalties for sudden inactivity | |
| Higher validation bonuses | Fast iteration | |
| Latest technology | ||
| use cases | Business applications and B2B | Startup network in the early stages |
| Finance app | Test new ideas | |
| High quality applications that require security such as banking, stability and robustness | The application does not require security like a bank and is powerful | |
| Upgrades for early-stage apps dụng | Pre-production environment for Polkadot |
speed
The first major technical difference between Polkadot and Kusama is that Kusama changed the administrative parameters to allow for faster upgrades. Kusama is four times faster than Polkadot, where token holders vote for the referendums in just 7 days, then the issuing time is 8 days and the referendum is issued on-chain. This means that stakeholders need to stay active and vigilant if they want to stay up to date on all of Kusama’s suggestions, surveys, upgrades, and validators, typically in a single announcement.
At Polkadot, voting takes 28 days, followed by a 28-day enactment period. This does not mean that the Kusama blockchain itself is faster, the block times or the transaction throughput are faster (these factors are the same on both networks), but there is a shorter interval between governance events, such as upgrades. This enabled Kusama to adapt and grow faster than polkadot.
Lean setup
Teams that want to run Parachain need to link tokens for security reasons. The link requirements on Kusama will likely be lower than on Polkadot.
When used
Polkadot will and will remain the primary network for the delivery of enterprise-class and high-quality, transaction-intensive applications that require bank-grade security and stability. The first use case for Kusama is a preproduction environment – the “Canary Network”. Building on Kusama, teams can first test everything in a live, fully decentralized, community-controlled network with real-world conditions and lower stakes in the event of a crash or outage compared to Polkadot.
Many projects will have parachains in both networks and will test and test new technologies and features on Kusama before deploying them in Polkadot. Some groups will choose to just stay in Kusama. Interesting experiments with new technologies could take place here in the future. Projects that require high throughput but don’t necessarily require security like banking, such as some gaming, social networking, and content distribution applications, are particularly good candidates for school.
Kusama could also prove to be the perfect environment for ambitious experimentation with new ideas and innovations in areas such as governance, incentives, monetary policy and DAOs (non-autonomous organizations). Future upgrades to the Polkadot runtime will likely also be implemented on Kusama prior to the Polkadot mainnet. This way, not only can we see how new technologies and features work in real-life conditions before we bring them to Polkadot, but the teams that have deployed on both networks also get a preview of how their own technology will follow up on these upgrades becomes .
Conclude
In short, Kusama and Polkadot will exist as independent networks with their own additional community, governance, and use cases, although they will continue to have a close relationship with many groups having the ability to deploy applications on both networks. In the future, we may also see Kusama connected to Polkadot for interoperability with multiple networks. The Web3 Foundation remains committed to both of them in the future, providing critical support and guidance to the teams building the ecosystem.
Minh Anh
According to Polkadot Network
Follow the Youtube Channel | Subscribe to telegram channel | Follow the Facebook page
Organic Coverage
