Free TON

Prolongation of the RTDB: Analyze Hypercore internals contest

Prolongation of the RTDB: Analyze Hypercore internals contest

Short description

Analyze Hypercore internal structure, execution flows and algorithms.

This is the same contest “# 5 RTDB: Analyze Hypercore internals”, which was announced on 26 October, 2020 and is completely its continuation. All requirements and conditions remain the same.




Starts: 21 November, 2020 at 01:00 PM UTC, Ends: 29 November, 2020 at 24:00 PM UTC


The reason for the contest prolongation is lack of submissions.

FreeTON RTDB implementation is a complicated task, so we split it into parts. At this stage, it is necessary to investigate possible solutions. Hypercore seems like a promising base, but before we start, we should get a deep understanding on how it works inside.

Our goal is to understand in detail what hypercore/hypertrie is and how it works internally. This will help us find ways to integrate.

General requirements

Submission should give as clear as possible explanation of hypercore, hypertrie (and possible other suitable hypercore-based solutions like hyperdrive) architecture, modules, code relations, execution flow, data structures, internal messages and used algorithms.

This explanation should help us answer a question, how hypercore can be integrated with FreeTON.

Participants should provide:

  • Description of the general architecture and main modules.
  • Description of data structures used.
  • Internal messaging and execution flow.
  • Build a code diagram.
  • Flow charts, who interacts with what and how.
  • Other helpful information will be a plus.

Technical recommendations

  1. Reports should be clear and easy to read.
  2. Try to provide a sufficiently in-depth analysis, but without unnecessary, obvious detail.

Evaluation criteria and winning conditions

Proposals will be judged strictly on the merit of their accuracy in addressing all requirements.

Only qualified proposals that meet all the required criteria will be considered.


1 place………………….……….:gem: 75’000
2 place………………….……….:gem: 60’000
3 place………….……………….:gem: 50’000
4-5 place……………………….:gem: 5’000
6-10 place………………………:gem: 1’000


  • Jurors whose team(s) intend to participate in this contest by providing submissions lose their right to vote in this contest.
  • Each juror will vote by rating each submission on a scale of 0 to 10 or can choose to reject it if it does not meet requirements, or they can choose to abstain from voting if they feel unqualified to judge.
  • Jurors will provide feedback on your submissions.
  • Duplicate, sub-par, incomplete, or inappropriate submissions will be rejected.

Jury rewards

An amount equal to 5% of the sum total of all total tokens actually awarded to winners of this contest will be divided equally between all jurors who vote and provide feedback. Both voting and feedback are mandatory in order to collect this reward.

Procedural reminders to all contestants

  • All submissions must be accessible for the jury to open and view, so please double-check your submission. If the submission is inaccessible or does not fit the criteria described, the submission may be rejected by jurors.
  • Contestants must submit their work before the closing of the filing of applications. If not submitted on time, the submission will not count.
  • All submissions must contain the contestant’s contact information, preferably a Telegram username by which jurors can verify that the submission belongs to the individual who submitted it. If not, your submission may be rejected.
  • The content published in the forum and in the provided PDF file should not differ, except for formatting, otherwise, the submission may be rejected by jurors.
  • If your submission has links to the work performed, the content of those links must have the contestant’s contact details, preferably a Telegram username so jurors can match it and verify who the work belongs to. If not, your submission may be rejected.
  • The work must be uploaded to the PDF and any links can only be used as support for the submission, but that only the work in the PDF will be judged.


Anyone can participate, but Free TON cannot distribute Tons to US citizens or US entities.


It is not clear for me why we need separate topic for this as this is the same contest. I mean this is the timeframe changes of the existing contest which exists in his own topic.
I would rather add this post to existing topic and add “Update: please see the latest changes here [link]” line to the first message (which is contest description) with the link to this post (which is good idea by its own, imho).

Hi community and jury! We happy to submit out research for RTDB: Analyze Hypercore internals contest. We hope we open up an avalanche of submissions. It’s really wide and intesting topic, we will read and research all other submission and we hope our research will useful for everyone also. Together we will build best blockcain project ever.


We are a team of 2 DevOps professionals who are passionate about blockchain technologies and wanna bring value to FreeTON development. Feel free to contact us in case of any questions:




Just sent our submission on RTDB: Analyze Hypercore internals contest.

Feel free to contact: @andreypf, @zxcat


And here is my submission to this contest.

Telegram contact: ded_mrz
Forum contact: @creator

1 Like

Hello respected community! Here is my proposal for the contest.

Telegram ID: @dividik

1 Like

Hello dear organizers of the contest! I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the first and second places in this competition were taken by the initial members of this subgovernance.

Konstantin Konstantinov (, public key 0f07a7cb924c7420520d0d98afad87d9b5e1765920fda698c22da6d0cd3354b9)
Peter Fedorov (, public key 9e808b1540babb85c428b9197b8df87860882d2db70607dfa134774a0513db30)

Listed at Free TON Dev Experience Governance Proposal.
Their applications do not indicate that they are members of the jury and they will not vote for this competition.
Could you clarify this point? Whose 2 out of 3 votes with high scores were given for these applications?

1 Like


Communication via email is not the most convenient way.

Next time please ask questions via telegram channel.

Could you clarify this point? Whose 2 out of 3 votes with high scores were given for these applications?

Those who participated in the contests could not evaluate works.

Therefore, the works in these contests were evaluated by @Futurizt and

In future, number of judges will be increased for more correct judging.





Hello! All serious issues in the Free TON community are resolved here on the forum. Thank you for the honesty and openness of the voting process. This is a great advantage for the growth of our community.