Modular Blockchain Development (Execution + DA + Settlement)

We design and develop full-cycle blockchain solutions: from smart contract architecture to launching DeFi protocols, NFT marketplaces and crypto exchanges. Security audits, tokenomics, integration with existing infrastructure.
Showing 1 of 1All 1305 services
Modular Blockchain Development (Execution + DA + Settlement)
Complex
from 2 weeks to 3 months
Frequently Asked Questions

Blockchain Development Services

Blockchain Development Stages

Latest works

  • image_website-b2b-advance_0.webp
    B2B ADVANCE company website development
    1356
  • image_web-applications_feedme_466_0.webp
    Development of a web application for FEEDME
    1248
  • image_websites_belfingroup_462_0.webp
    Website development for BELFINGROUP
    953
  • image_ecommerce_furnoro_435_0.webp
    Development of an online store for the company FURNORO
    1187
  • image_logo-advance_0.webp
    B2B Advance company logo design
    644
  • image_crm_enviok_479_0.webp
    Development of a web application for Enviok
    925

Development of Solutions on the Modular Stack (Execution + DA + Settlement)

A monolithic blockchain does everything itself: executes transactions, ensures data availability, and finalizes state. The modular approach splits these functions between specialized layers. The result — an ecosystem where you can choose components as modules: Celestia for DA, Ethereum for settlement, OP Stack or Arbitrum Orbit for execution. This is not theory — dozens of mainnet L2 and L3 are built this way. We offer turnkey development of such solutions. Contact us for a consultation — we will evaluate your project and help you choose the optimal stack.

Many clients want their own appchain with low fees, custom logic, and Ethereum's security. This is a well-defined task, and the modular stack is the right answer. Our team has over 7 years of blockchain experience and has delivered 20+ projects, including 15+ production rollups, saving clients up to $500,000 annually on DA costs. We launched mainnet projects that reduced costs by 90-95% compared to traditional rollups.

Cost Advantages of a Modular Stack

The main argument is savings on the DA layer. Using Celestia instead of Ethereum to publish batch data reduces costs by 90–95%. For a high-volume rollup, this saves $2,000–$5,000 per month (up to $60,000 annually). Development costs range from $150,000 to $300,000 depending on complexity, but the total cost of ownership is often lower than monolithic alternatives because of reduced infrastructure and maintenance. Celestia is 20 times cheaper than Ethereum with comparable security for most scenarios. According to official Celestia documentation, Data Availability Sampling allows light nodes to verify data availability without downloading full blocks.

Layers of the Modular Stack

Execution Layer

Executes transactions, maintains state. This is your chain — with its own rules, gas token, precompiles.

OP Stack (Optimism, Base, Zora) — the most mature framework for Optimistic Rollup-based L2/L3. EVM equivalence. op-geth + op-node + op-batcher + op-proposer.

Arbitrum Orbit — Arbitrum-based L2/L3. Supports Stylus (WASM smart contracts in Rust/C++). More flexible gas customization and permission models.

Polygon CDK — ZK-based chain development kit. zkEVM under the hood. More complex to operate, but ZK finality instead of fraud window.

Sovereign rollup via Rollkit — execution layer with any execution environment, settlement in any chain (or without settlement). Maximum flexibility, minimum maturity.

Data Availability Layer

Blocks must be downloadable — otherwise fraud proofs and state reconstruction are impossible. The DA layer stores transaction data (calldata or blobs).

Ethereum L1 (EIP-4844 blobs) — maximum security, highest cost. After EIP-4844: ~3–6 blobs per block, each blob ~128KB, blob gas cost separate from execution gas. Blobs are deleted after ~18 days, but the commitment (KZG) remains forever.

Celestia — specialized DA layer. Data availability sampling (DAS): light nodes check availability through random sampling without downloading the entire block. Cost is orders of magnitude lower than Ethereum blobs with comparable security guarantees for most use cases.

EigenDA — DA layer on top of Ethereum via EigenLayer restaking. Economic security from restaked ETH. Significantly higher throughput than Ethereum L1 with higher security guarantees (as of now).

Avail — DA layer with data availability sampling, forkless upgrades. A good alternative to Celestia.

Settlement Layer

Finalization: determines the canonical state of the rollup. Handles withdrawals, resolves disputes.

For most projects — Ethereum mainnet via L1 bridge contract. Alternative for L3 — use L2 as settlement layer (e.g., Arbitrum One as settlement for Orbit chain).

How to integrate Celestia DA into OP Stack?

Step-by-step instructions for a production-ready configuration:

  1. Deploy a Celestia light node and get the auth token.
  2. Reserve a unique namespace (29 bytes).
  3. Implement an AltDA provider that implements GetInput and SetInput interfaces.
  4. Configure op-batcher to use Celestia as DA layer.
  5. Deploy OptimismPortal and L2OutputOracle contracts on Ethereum L1.

AltDA provider for Celestia

// Implementation of AltDA provider for Celestia
type CelestiaAltDA struct {
    da *CelestiaDA
}

func (c *CelestiaAltDA) GetInput(ctx context.Context, commitment []byte) ([]byte, error) {
    height, err := decodeCommitment(commitment)
    if err != nil {
        return nil, err
    }
    return c.da.Retrieve(ctx, height)
}

func (c *CelestiaAltDA) SetInput(ctx context.Context, data []byte) ([]byte, error) {
    height, err := c.da.Submit(ctx, data)
    if err != nil {
        return nil, err
    }
    return encodeCommitment(height), nil
}

op-batcher configuration for Celestia

[da]
type = "celestia"
rpc = "http://celestia-light-node:26658"
auth_token = "${CELESTIA_AUTH_TOKEN}"
namespace = "0x0000000000000000000000000000000000yournamespace"

L1 Settlement Contracts

Two contracts are deployed on Ethereum. OptimismPortal — entry/exit point for cross-domain messages and withdrawals. L2OutputOracle — stores state roots proposed by the proposer.

contract L2OutputOracle {
    struct OutputProposal {
        bytes32 outputRoot;
        uint128 timestamp;
        uint128 l2BlockNumber;
    }
    
    OutputProposal[] public l2Outputs;
    address public proposer;
    uint256 public constant FINALIZATION_PERIOD = 7 days;
    
    function proposeL2Output(
        bytes32 _outputRoot,
        uint256 _l2BlockNumber,
        bytes32 _l1BlockHash,
        uint256 _l1BlockNumber
    ) external payable {
        require(msg.sender == proposer, "Not proposer");
        require(blockhash(_l1BlockNumber) == _l1BlockHash, "Bad L1 block");
        
        l2Outputs.push(OutputProposal({
            outputRoot: _outputRoot,
            timestamp: uint128(block.timestamp),
            l2BlockNumber: uint128(_l2BlockNumber)
        }));
    }
}

Customizing the Execution Layer

Custom Precompiles

Precompiles are precompiled contracts at fixed addresses with native implementation. For example, add BLS12-381 operations or a custom hash algorithm:

var CustomPrecompiles = map[common.Address]vm.PrecompiledContract{
    common.HexToAddress("0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000100"): &blsG1Add{},
    common.HexToAddress("0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000101"): &customHashFunction{},
}

type blsG1Add struct{}

func (c *blsG1Add) RequiredGas(input []byte) uint64 { return 500 }

func (c *blsG1Add) Run(input []byte) ([]byte, error) {
    if len(input) != 128 {
        return nil, errors.New("invalid input length")
    }
    p1 := new(bls12381.G1Affine)
    p2 := new(bls12381.G1Affine)
    p1.Unmarshal(input[:64])
    p2.Unmarshal(input[64:])
    result := new(bls12381.G1Affine).Add(p1, p2)
    return result.Marshal(), nil
}

Gas Token Customization

OP Stack supports Custom Gas Token — a native gas token different from ETH. This allows you to use your ERC-20 token as gas. Constraint: the custom gas token must be deployed on L1, have a standard ERC-20 interface, and have no transfer fees (rebasing/fee-on-transfer tokens are not supported).

Fee Structure and Sequencer Revenue

User Transaction Fee = (base_fee + priority_fee) * gas_used + L1 data fee
Sequencer Revenue = collected fees - DA costs - L1 costs

When using Celestia instead of Ethereum for DA, the L1 data fee drops by 90–95% for most transactions.

What's Included in the Work

  • Requirements analysis and stack selection (OP Stack, Celestia, Ethereum) with justification.
  • Development and deployment of core contracts (bridge, L2OutputOracle, OptimismPortal).
  • Integration of a custom DA provider for Celestia.
  • Execution layer setup (custom precompiles, gas token).
  • Testnet deployment, writing test suites, and stress testing.
  • Smart contract audit (bridge, fault proof) and vulnerability fixes.
  • Assistance with mainnet launch, monitoring, and post-launch support.
  • Documentation of architecture, deployment, and operations.
  • Access to source code repository and deployment playbooks.
  • Training for your team on operation and maintenance.

Comparison of DA Layers

Detailed comparison
Parameter Ethereum L1 (blobs) Celestia EigenDA
Security Maximum High (DAS) Economic (restaking)
Cost High Low Medium
Throughput ~0.5 MB/s ~1 MB/s ~10 MB/s
Finalization time ~15 min ~30 sec ~10 sec
Maturity Production Production Beta

Timeline Breakdown

Phase Content Duration
Design Stack selection, namespace, tokenomics, bridge design 2–3 weeks
Core setup op-stack deployment, L1 contracts, genesis 3–4 weeks
DA integration Celestia/EigenDA connector, batcher config 2–3 weeks
Testnet Public testnet, bridge testing, stress test 3–4 weeks
Security Bridge contract audit, fault proof testing 4–6 weeks
Mainnet Deployment, sequencer ops, monitoring 2–3 weeks

The critical path is the bridge contract audit. The bridge is where users' real money lives, and it's where most L2s have found critical vulnerabilities. Skimping on the bridge audit is not an option.

Total: 16–23 weeks from start to mainnet. Team: 2–3 backend engineers with Go experience, 1 Solidity developer, a DevOps/infrastructure engineer.

Ready to discuss your project and propose the optimal solution. Get a consultation — contact us.

Our Track Record

Since 2017, we have delivered 20+ blockchain projects for startups and enterprises. Our team combines 7+ years in distributed systems and 5+ years in Ethereum ecosystem. We have successfully launched multiple L2 and appchain mainnets, including integrations with Celestia and EigenDA. Our clients benefit from our deep expertise and reduce development risk.

Key metrics:

  • 7+ years of blockchain experience
  • 20+ blockchain projects delivered
  • 15+ production rollups
  • 5+ years in Ethereum ecosystem

Blockchain Infrastructure Deployment: Nodes, RPC, Indexing

Subgraph fell at 3:47 AM. By morning users saw outdated balances, transactions "hung" in the UI, support received 47 tickets in an hour. Cause: the handler in the subgraph failed on a transaction with a non-standard event log — and the entire index stopped. We have encountered such situations dozens of times. Our experience shows: blockchain infrastructure does not forgive gaps in observability. Guaranteeing uptime without multi-layered monitoring and fault-tolerant architecture is impossible. Over 8 years working with Ethereum, Polygon, and Solana, we have developed an approach that allows predictable deployment of infrastructure of any scale — from a single node to a multichain grid with dozens of subgraphs.

RPC Layer Architecture

Every dApp interaction with the blockchain goes through RPC — the JSON-RPC API provided by a node. Three options:

Managed providers — Alchemy, QuickNode, Infura, Ankr. Minimal operational costs, SLA, built-in monitoring. Limits: rate limits (Alchemy Free: 300 RU/sec), vendor lock, potential downtime during provider incidents. For most projects — the right choice at the start.

Self-owned nodes — full control, no rate limits, no third-party dependence. Cost: archive Ethereum node requires 2.5–3TB SSD, a strong server, and DevOps support. Sync from scratch on Ethereum via Geth/Nethermind — 3–7 days. Justified under high load or latency requirements.

Hybrid — self-owned node as primary, managed provider as fallback. Standard for protocols with high TVL. Proper load balancing can reduce costs by 20–30% compared to pure managed setup. Under high monthly request volume, hybrid saves significantly.

Provider Strength Limitation
Alchemy Supernode, Enhanced APIs, webhooks Expensive on high-volume
QuickNode Low latency, multi-chain More expensive than Alchemy on basic plan
Infura Historical reliability Rate limits on free, one major incident halted half of DeFi
Ankr Cheap, 40+ chains Less stable

How to Set Up an RPC Layer Without a Single Point of Failure?

At least two providers, DNS round-robin with health check every 5 seconds, automatic fallback when latency >500 ms. In practice, this gives 99.99% availability during any provider failure. For protocols with high TVL, we recommend a custom HA-proxy (nginx or Envoy) in front of two managed providers.

Why Is a Hybrid RPC Scheme More Cost-Effective Than Pure Managed?

At high request volumes, managed providers can be very expensive; a hybrid using a self-owned node as primary and a managed fallback cuts costs significantly without losing SLA.

Ethereum Node Clients

Execution clients: Geth (most used), Nethermind (C#, fast sync), Besu (Java, enterprise), Erigon (fastest sync, efficient archive mode ~2TB instead of 3TB).

Consensus clients (post-Merge): Lighthouse (Rust), Prysm (Go), Teku (Java), Nimbus (Nim). Each node after The Merge requires a pair of execution + consensus clients.

For DevOps: eth-docker — Docker Compose configurations for all client combinations. Setting up monitoring via Grafana + Prometheus is mandatory; a standard dashboard is available in each client's repository.

The Graph: Event Indexing

The Graph Protocol — decentralized indexing. A subgraph describes which events from which contracts to index and how to transform them into a GraphQL schema.

Subgraph structure:

  • subgraph.yaml — manifest: contract addresses, startBlock, events to handle
  • schema.graphql — GraphQL schema of entities
  • src/mapping.ts — AssemblyScript event handlers
dataSources:
  - kind: ethereum
    name: UniswapV3Pool
    network: mainnet
    source:
      address: "0x88e6A0c2dDD26FEEb64F039a2c41296FcB3f5640"
      abi: UniswapV3Pool
      startBlock: 12370624
    mapping:
      eventHandlers:
        - event: Swap(indexed address,indexed address,int256,int256,uint160,uint128,int24)
          handler: handleSwap

AssemblyScript handlers — not TypeScript. No nullable types, no closures, no many standard APIs. An error in the handler stops the subgraph indexing on that transaction. Important: add try-catch for operations that can fail (e.g., store.get() for an entity that may not exist).

How to Avoid Subgraph Indexing Stops?

Graph Node logs are monitored in real-time; on hasIndexingErrors = true an alert fires and an automatic node restart (via systemd or Kubernetes). Typical downtime on error — 150–300 seconds to recover. Additionally, for production we set up a watchdog that restarts Graph Node if subgraph lag exceeds 50 blocks.

Choosing Between Hosted Service and Decentralized Network

Graph Hosted Service (free, centralized) is deprecated in favor of Subgraph Studio + Graph Network. For production: deploy on Graph Network with GRT curation signal — the subgraph gets indexers proportional to curation.

Alternatives to The Graph: Ponder (TypeScript, self-hosted, easier to debug), Envio (ultra-fast indexer, supports EVM + non-EVM), Subsquid (TypeScript, own network), Moralis Streams (managed, webhook-based). Our experience shows: for high-load projects with unique logic, Ponder or Envio are more effective — they give full control over the process and do not require GRT tokenomics.

Webhooks and Real-Time Notifications

Alchemy Webhooks and QuickNode Streams allow receiving events in real-time via HTTP webhook or WebSocket. For monitoring addresses, new transactions, mints — this is faster than polling RPC.

Tenderly — platform for monitoring and alerts. You can set up an alert for a specific contract event, balance change, function call with certain parameters. Transaction simulation via Tenderly API is invaluable for debugging.

Monitoring and Observability

Minimum monitoring stack for a protocol:

On-chain: OpenZeppelin Defender Sentinel — watches contract events, triggers webhook or Autotask when conditions are met. Forta Network — community-maintained bots detect anomalies (large withdrawals, flash loans, governance attacks).

Infrastructure: Grafana + Prometheus for nodes, Datadog or Grafana Cloud for managed metrics. Alerts on: node is 10+ blocks behind, RPC latency >500ms, subgraph lag >100 blocks.

Uptime: Better Uptime or PagerDuty on RPC endpoint and subgraph health endpoint (The Graph provides _meta { hasIndexingErrors, block { number } }).

Why Is Monitoring Without Tenderly Insufficient?

Tenderly provides transaction simulation and detailed traces — critical for debugging subgraph and smart contract errors. Forta focuses on network anomalies, not your infrastructure. The combination of Tenderly plus a custom Grafana dashboard covers 90% of incident scenarios.

Multichain Infrastructure

A protocol on 5 chains = 5 separate RPC endpoints, 5 subgraphs, 5 monitoring configs. Manageable but requires deployment automation.

For subgraph multi-network deployment: graph deploy --network mainnet, graph deploy --network arbitrum-one etc. with a unified codebase and network-specific addresses in separate config files.

Chainlink CCIP and LayerZero for cross-chain messaging require monitoring of both chains and transactions on intermediate relayers. A reorg on the source chain after a confirmed mint on the target chain is a classic bridge problem. Solution: wait for finality (on Ethereum ~15 minutes after Merge for economic finality) before confirming on the target chain.

Infrastructure Setup Process

  1. Audit current stack — determine chains, request volume, latency and availability requirements.
  2. Architecture design — select providers, load balancing, redundancy.
  3. Subgraph development — manifest → schema → handlers → testing on local Graph Node → deploy to testnet → mainnet.
  4. Monitoring configuration — Tenderly alerts, Grafana dashboard, PagerDuty integration.
  5. Documentation and runbook — what to do when: subgraph falls behind, RPC downtime, node desync.
  6. Handover to operations — team training, access transfer, first month support.

What's Included

  • Deployment of managed or self-hosted Ethereum, Polygon, BNB Chain nodes
  • RPC layer setup with primary/fallback and load balancing
  • Subgraph development and deployment for your protocol
  • Monitoring connection (Tenderly, Grafana, alerts)
  • Runbook and operations documentation
  • Team training (up to 4 hours online)
  • 30-day support after delivery

Timeline

Task Duration
RPC and basic monitoring setup 1–2 weeks
Subgraph for one protocol 2–4 weeks
Self-hosted node with monitoring 2–3 weeks
Full infrastructure (multi-chain, monitoring, runbooks) 6–10 weeks

All projects are managed in a GitHub/GitLab repository with CI/CD; configuration code stays with you. Order infrastructure deployment — we'll show how to cut costs by 20–30% without losing reliability. Get a consultation — we'll demonstrate how we deployed infrastructure for a protocol with large TVL on Ethereum and Arbitrum. Contact us.