Skip to content

ARCHITECTURE.md

Latest commit

 

History

History
76 lines (64 loc) · 4.54 KB

ARCHITECTURE.md

File metadata and controls

76 lines (64 loc) · 4.54 KB

BaseStay Architecture Options

Option 1: Current Hybrid (Recommended)

┌─────────────────┐    ┌─────────────────┐    ┌─────────────────┐
│   Frontend      │    │   Database      │    │ Base L2         │
│   (Next.js)     │────│   (PostgreSQL)  │────│ (Smart Contracts│
│                 │    │                 │    │  + USDC)        │
└─────────────────┘    └─────────────────┘    └─────────────────┘
     │                         │                         │
     ├── User Interface        ├── Search & Cache        ├── Ownership
     ├── Web3 Integration      ├── User Profiles         ├── Payments
     └── Responsive Design     ├── Property Metadata     ├── Reviews (Hash)
                               ├── Messages              └── Booking Records
                               └── Analytics

Pros: ✅ Fast search, ✅ Good UX, ✅ Blockchain benefits, ✅ Cost effective
Cons: ❌ Need server infrastructure, ❌ Centralized components

Option 2: Pure Decentralized (Possible but Expensive)

┌─────────────────┐    ┌─────────────────┐    ┌─────────────────┐
│   Frontend      │    │   IPFS          │    │ Base L2         │  
│   (Static)      │────│   (File Storage)│────│ (All Data)      │
│                 │    │                 │    │                 │
└─────────────────┘    └─────────────────┘    └─────────────────┘
     │                         │                         │
     ├── Web3 Only             ├── Images               ├── ALL DATA
     ├── Metamask Required     ├── Metadata             ├── Expensive Queries
     └── Slow Loading          ├── Search Index         ├── High Gas Fees   
                               └── User Profiles        └── Slow Performance

Pros: ✅ 100% Decentralized, ✅ Censorship Resistant
Cons: ❌ Expensive, ❌ Slow, ❌ Poor UX, ❌ High barrier to entry

Option 3: Hybrid with Web3 Storage (Advanced)

┌─────────────────┐    ┌─────────────────┐    ┌─────────────────┐
│   Frontend      │    │   Web3 Storage  │    │ Base L2         │
│   (Next.js)     │────│   (Arweave/IPFS)│────│ (Core Logic)    │
│                 │    │                 │    │                 │
└─────────────────┘    └─────────────────┘    └─────────────────┘
     │                         │                         │
     ├── Fast Interface        ├── Decentralized Files  ├── Ownership
     ├── Caching Layer         ├── Content Addressing   ├── Payments  
     └── Progressive Web3      ├── Permanent Storage    ├── Critical Data
                               └── Lower Cost           └── Consensus

Pros: ✅ More decentralized, ✅ Permanent storage, ✅ Good performance
Cons: ❌ Complex setup, ❌ Higher development cost

Recommended for BaseStay Production

Option 1 (Current Hybrid) is optimal because:

  1. Cost Effective: Database queries cost pennies vs blockchain queries costing dollars
  2. Performance: Sub-second search vs minutes on blockchain
  3. User Experience: Familiar interface, no wallet required for browsing
  4. Scalability: Handle millions of users without blockchain bottlenecks
  5. Flexibility: Easy to add features like recommendations, analytics

Data Flow Strategy:

Write Path: Frontend → Database → Blockchain (for critical data)
Read Path: Frontend ← Database (with blockchain verification)

Critical on Blockchain: Ownership, Payments, Reviews
Cache in Database: Search, User Profiles, Property Details

This gives you best of both worlds:

  • Blockchain security for money & ownership
  • Traditional database speed for everything else