Narwhal, Bullshark, and Tusk, Sui's Mempool and Consensus Engines

This is a brief introduction to Narwhal, Tusk, and Bullshark, the high-throughput mempool and consensus engines offered by Mysten Labs and used in Sui. As of Dec 2022, Sui uses Narwhal as the mempool and Bullshark as the consensus engine by default, to sequence transactions that require a total ordering, synchronize transactions between validators and periodically checkpoint the network's state.

The names highlight that the components split the responsibilities of:

  • ensuring the availability of data submitted to consensus = Narwhal
  • agreeing on a specific ordering of this data = Bullshark or Tusk

In August 2022, Bullshark replaced the Tusk component of the consensus protocol as the default for reduced latency and support for fairness (where even slow validators can contribute). See DAG Meets BFT - The Next Generation of BFT Consensus for a comparison of the protocols.

Still, you may easily use Tusk instead of Bullshark by updating the order engine in source.

Consensus is accomplished in two layered modules, so Narwhal can also be used coupled with an external consensus algorithm, such as HotStuff, Istanbul BFT, or Tendermint. Narwhal is undergoing integration in the Celo and Sommelier blockchain.

The Sui Consensus Engine represents the latest variant of decades of work on multi-proposer, high-throughput consensus algorithms that reach throughputs of more than 125,000 transactions per second with a two-second latency for a deployment of 50 parties, with production cryptography, permanent storage, and a scaled-out primary-worker architecture.

The Sui Consensus Engine approach can offer dramatic scalability benefits in the following cases:

  • a blockchain that has experimented with larger and larger blocks and has measured runaway latencies before the execution phase
  • a blockchain with fast execution (e.g., focused on transactions or with an UTXO data model), but which mempool and consensus do not keep up


The Narwhal mempool offers:

  • a high-throughput data availability engine, with cryptographic proofs of data availability at a primary node
  • a structured graph data structure for traversing this information
  • a scaled architecture, splitting the disk I/O and networking requirements across several workers

The consensus component offers a zero-message overhead consensus algorithm, leveraging graph traversals.


A Narwhal instance sets up a message-passing system comprised of a set of $3f+1$ units of stake divided amongst a set of nodes, and assumes a computationally bounded adversary that controls the network and can corrupt parties holding up to f units of stake. The validators collaborate in forming a leaderless graph of batches of transactions - which the literature (in the context of DAG-based consensus) designates as blocks and that we label as collections - to emphasize we're in a context where the mempool data is used by an unspecified consensus algorithm.

The graph's vertices consist of certified collections. Each valid collection signed by its validator-author must contain a round number and must itself be signed by a quorum (2f+1) of validator stake. We call those 2f+1 signatures a certificate of availability. Furthermore, that collection must contain hash pointers to a quorum of valid certificates (that is, certificates from validators with 2f + 1 units of stake) from the previous round (see Danezis & al. Fig 2), which constitute the edges of the graph.

Each collection is formed in the following way: each validator reliably broadcasts a collection for each round. Subject to specified validity conditions, if validators with 2f + 1 stake receive a collection, they acknowledge it with a signature each. Signatures from 2f + 1 validators by stake form a certificate of availability that is then shared and potentially included in collections at round r + 1.

The following figure represents five rounds of construction of such a DAG (1 to 5), with authorities A, B, C and D participating. For simplicity, each validator holds 1 unit of stake. The collections transitively acknowledged by A's latest round in A5 are represented in full lines in the graph.

flowchart TB subgraph A A5 --> A4 --> A3 --> A2 --> A1 end subgraph B B5 -.-> B4 --> B3 --> B2 --> B1 end subgraph C C5 -.-> C4 --> C3 --> C2 --> C1 end subgraph D D5 -.-> D4 -.-> D3 --> D2 --> D1 end A5 --> B4 & C4 A4 --> C3 & D3 A3 --> B2 & C2 A2 --> C1 & D1 B5 -.-> A4 & C4 B4 --> C3 & D3 B3 --> A2 & C2 B2 --> C1 & D1 C5 -.-> A4 & B4 C4 --> B3 & D3 C3 --> A2 & B2 C2 --> B1 & D1 D5 -.-> A4 & B4 D4 -.-> B3 & C3 D3 --> A2 & B2 D2 --> B1 & C1

How it works

  • The graph construction allows inserting more transactions in the system at each authority and at each round.
  • The certificates prove the data availability of each collection, or block, at each round.
  • Their contents constitute a DAG that can be traversed identically at each honest node.

While the Bullshark or Tusk consensus selects a specific DAG traversal among several a posteriori, both they and external consensus algorithms can add more sophistication to their selection of blocks / collections to reflect priority concerns.


Narwhal is implemented using Tokio, RocksDB and generic cryptography. The cryptography contains implementations of node signing using BLS12-377, BLS12-381, and Ed25519.


To conduct a fresh deployment of Sui Consensus Engine, follow the instructions at Running Benchmarks.

Further reading

Narwhal and Tusk (Danezis et al. 2021) is a consensus system leveraging directed acyclic graphs (DAG). DAG-based consensus has been developed over the last 30 years, and some of the history is summarized in (Wang & al. 2020). The closest theoretical ancestor of Narwhal & Tusk is (Keidar & al. 2021).

Narwhal & Tusk are developed in the asynchronous model. A partially synchronous variant of Narwhal and Tusk, called Bullshark, is presented in (Giridharan 2022).

Narwhal and Tusk started as a research prototype at Facebook Novi.

Bullshark: DAG BFT Protocols Made Practical - Bullshark replaces Tusk for even greater performance.

Bullshark: The Partially Synchronous Version - A simplified version of Bullshark that is used in Sui today.

DAG Meets BFT - The Next Generation of BFT Consensus - Explains the evolution of the consensus protocol used by Sui.


  • Danezis, G., Kogias, E. K., Sonnino, A., & Spiegelman, A. (2021). Narwhal and Tusk: A DAG-based Mempool and Efficient BFT Consensus. ArXiv:2105.11827 [Cs].
  • Giridharan, N., Kokoris-Kogias, L., Sonnino, A., & Spiegelman, A. (2022). Bullshark: DAG BFT Protocols Made Practical. ArXiv:2201.05677 [Cs].
  • Spiegelman, A., Giridharan, N., Sonnino, A., & Kokoris-Kogias, L. (2022). Bullshark: The Partially Synchronous Version. ArXiv:2209.05633 [Cs].
  • Keidar, I., Kokoris-Kogias, E., Naor, O., & Spiegelman, A. (2021). All You Need is DAG. ArXiv:2102.08325 [Cs].
  • Wang, Q., Yu, J., Chen, S., & Xiang, Y. (2020). SoK: Diving into DAG-based Blockchain Systems. ArXiv:2012.06128 [Cs].
Last update 1/10/2023, 5:37:08 PM