Sui's architecture reveals a fundamental gap that Walrus addresses - the chain can process transactions efficiently, but storing large data objects on-chain is economically and technically impractical. Another L2 wouldn't solve this because L2s primarily offer more execution capacity, not decentralized storage infrastructure.
Blockchains charge for state storage because every validator must maintain it indefinitely. For small transaction data this works, but for files, media, or application assets it becomes prohibitively expensive. Sui can handle high throughput for financial transactions or NFT mints, but if every image, video, or user-generated file lives on-chain, costs explode and node requirements become unreasonable. An L2 just replicates this problem at a different layer.
Walrus provides blob storage that's decentralized but optimized differently than blockchain state. It uses erasure coding to distribute data across nodes efficiently, so applications built on Sui can reference large objects stored on Walrus without bloating the chain. This separation lets Sui focus on what it does well - fast consensus and execution - while Walrus handles what blockchains do poorly - cost-effective persistent storage of arbitrary data.
The real need emerges when you consider what applications actually require. Social networks, gaming platforms, creative tools, file-sharing services all generate data that far exceeds typical transaction sizes. Without dedicated storage infrastructure, these applications either centralize their data layer, which defeats the purpose of building on a decentralized chain, or become economically unviable from storage costs. Another L2 offering cheaper transactions doesn't help if the core issue is where to put gigabytes of user content.
Walrus makes Sui more complete as a platform for applications that aren't purely financial. It's the difference between offering faster roads versus building warehouses - complementary infrastructure rather than redundant capacity. @Walrus 🦭/acc #walrus $WAL