Recently, a friend who develops blockchain complained to me about getting confused between Web3 cloud storage and IPFS when choosing a storage solution. Both names sound quite futuristic, but the differences in usage are significant. Today, let's discuss this in plain language and share some practical experiences.

Different Underlying Logics

Let's start with IPFS. It is more like a decentralized file distribution network. I used it during an NFT project last year, where uploaded images would be broken into data blocks and stored across global nodes. There was a time when the server went down, but thanks to IPFS, users could still access the content, which was indeed great.

On the other hand, Web3 cloud storage, like Arweave, focuses on the concept of permanent storage. I’ve seen a digital art platform use it to store works, theoretically making it impossible to delete once uploaded, which is particularly suitable for content that requires proof of ownership. However, the costs… storing small files is fine, but for large files, the wallet takes a significant hit.

Practical Differences in Use

The speed aspect is quite interesting. IPFS has a caching mechanism, so popular content loads quickly, but obscure files may take time for nodes to find. Once, I waited a full 20 seconds for a document from three months ago to load.

Web3 cloud storage is relatively stable since the data genuinely exists on the chain. However, during the recent Ethereum congestion, a colleague spent $30 in gas fees to store a 2MB contract, which made him quite upset.

Clear Understanding of Applicable Scenarios

If you are developing a DApp that requires high-frequency access to dynamic data, IPFS might be more flexible. Our team used this solution for a decentralized microblogging project last year, allowing user-uploaded content to sync quickly.

However, for scenarios involving legal contracts or copyrighted works that require solid proof, the immutability of Web3 cloud storage shows its advantages. A friend who creates music NFTs mentioned that they now store demos and copyright certificates on Arweave, which is more reliable than a notary office.

Common Pitfalls for Beginners

When I first started, I thought these two could completely replace each other, but I ended up making a mistake. I stored important data on IPFS without backups and later found that access was unstable after some nodes went offline. Now I've learned my lesson; critical data is backed up on both IPFS and Web3 cloud storage. Although it costs a bit more, I sleep soundly.

There's also a cost issue that is easy to overlook. IPFS seems free, but to ensure data availability, you need to pin the files, and over time, the hosting fees for professional nodes can add up. I once saw a startup team that didn’t calculate this correctly, leading to a doubling of their operational costs later on.

These two technologies are actually quite complementary. Some projects are starting to mix and match, placing hot data on IPFS and important data on-chain. Platforms like OpenSea have been doing this for a while, ensuring both access speed and data security. Ultimately, technology is neither good nor bad; it depends on how you combine and apply it. Before making a choice next time, it might be helpful to create a list of business requirements and compare the pros and cons of each solution, which is much more reliable than blindly following trends. (Source: https://www.fangyidian.com/14218.html)

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。