As far I understand for the ZK-EVM
- User sends txn from wallet to the sequencer
- Squencer sends the txn data in batches to L1 smart contract. (1 transaction done)
- Then again prover takes the txn data and creates proof and commits to L1 (1 transaction done)
In this way for every transaction on ZK-EVM, 2 transactions need to be done in L1.
If so, then if I don’t care about gas price and need the speed in such case ZK-EVM might not be suitable correct ??
To be clear, transactions 2 and 3 are for the settlement of batches for the rollup itself. If you trust the sequencer, you have near instant completion of the transaction on L2.
From a speed prospective, zkEVM is one of the fastest L2s to achieve a final state, with withdrawals taking 1 batch proof (30-40 minutes today) compared to 24 hours for other zk rollups and 7 days (!!) for optimistic rollups.
No, it wouldn’t be correct to say that Polygon’s ZK-EVM takes 2 transactions on Layer 1 (L1) to make a transaction on Layer 2 (L2). In fact, one of the main benefits of Layer 2 solutions like Polygon’s ZK-EVM is to reduce the number of transactions on the Layer 1 chain.