feat(restore): bring back solana-tx-landing-latency bench (#027)

answers/which-solana-rpc-lands-the-most-transactions.yml

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+slug: which-solana-rpc-lands-the-most-transactions
+question: "Which Solana RPC provider lands the most transactions in 2026?"
+short_answer: |
+  {{best_name}} currently leads Solana transaction landing latency at {{best_p50}} (p50, 24h), the lowest slot-delta between transaction submission and confirmation across the measured RPC field.
+
+benchmark: solana-tx-landing-latency
+
+intro: |
+  Solana trading bots, MEV searchers and on-chain settlement all live or die on the same metric: how reliably and quickly does the RPC endpoint actually land the transaction on a leader's block. Marketing pages publish landing-rate numbers; almost none publish methodology or a live, neutral comparison. This page answers the question that wallet integrations, agent infrastructure and trading desks ask before pasting a URL into production. Which RPC provider is actually landing transactions the fastest right now, measured in slot delta between submission and confirmation, with a probe that runs continuously from multiple regions against the same canonical leader schedule.
+
+methodology: |
+  The harness submits a self-signed compute-unit-cheap transaction every few seconds through each RPC provider's submission endpoint, then watches a canonical archive node for the resulting confirmation. The landing latency is the wall-clock slot delta between submission and confirmation, expressed in milliseconds at Solana's 400 ms slot interval. The p50 over 24h is the headline metric; p99 captures the worst 1 percent of cases, where a provider's regional infrastructure or leader proximity surfaces clearly. Probes run from US-East, EU-West and Singapore against the same canonical archive node so any geographic asymmetry shows up as a per-region split, not as a noise floor on the aggregate.
+
+limitations:
+  - "Slot delta is not the same as fee. A provider can land transactions fastest while charging a per-transaction priority fee through Jito or a similar bundler; cost-per-landed-transaction is a composite metric the leaderboard does not currently surface."
+  - "Self-signed test transactions do not exercise the full priority-fee mempool. A real production transaction with a high priority fee and CU budget lands faster than the probes shown here, and the relative ordering can shift when paying for inclusion."
+  - "Provider landing performance shifts with Solana validator leader schedule. A provider with relayers physically close to today's leader can outperform on this window and lose its lead next epoch when the schedule rotates."
+  - "This is not a stake-weighted measurement. The harness measures wall-clock landing time at the canonical archive node level, not the share of stake reached at each submission."
+
+faq:
+  - q: "What does landing latency actually measure?"
+    a: "Wall-clock milliseconds between the moment a probe submits a self-signed transaction to a Solana RPC and the moment a canonical archive node sees the same transaction in a confirmed block. Lower is faster. The number is the time from your code calling send to the network treating the transaction as included."
+  - q: "Why is this different from Solana block time?"
+    a: "Solana block time is the chain's slot interval, fixed at 400 milliseconds. Landing latency is the time your transaction takes to reach the leader plus the leader's time to include it plus the propagation back to a canonical observer. The chain produces a slot every 400 milliseconds whether or not your transaction lands in it; the question this page answers is which provider's path gets you into the next available slot most consistently."
+  - q: "Does Jito's bundler beat raw RPC landing?"
+    a: "On the measured probes, Jito bundling is treated as a provider option, not as a separate metric. When the harness submits through a Jito-aware provider with bundle inclusion enabled, the path includes the bundler. The leaderboard surfaces both Jito and non-Jito providers in the same field so the relative cost of bundling is visible."
+  - q: "What regions are the probes from?"
+    a: "US-East, EU-West and Singapore. Cross-region probes catch providers whose landing performance is asymmetric across geography (an RPC fast from EU but slow from APAC is common). The leaderboard reports the cross-region p50; the per-region breakdown is on the bench page."
+  - q: "Why not measure with my own real workload?"
+    a: "Real workloads are the ground truth, but they are not comparable across providers because they carry different priority fees, different program calls, and run from different infrastructure. The harness controls for those variables to publish a fair cross-provider comparison; for your specific workload, run the same harness yourself (it is open source) and compare."
+
+related:
+  - which-blockchain-has-cheapest-transaction-fees
+  - which-l1-has-the-fastest-finality
+
+seo_title: "Which Solana RPC provider lands the most transactions in 2026?"
+seo_description: "{{best_name}} leads Solana transaction landing at {{best_p50}} slot delta (p50, 24h) measured live by OpenChainBench. Methodology, regional probes and limitations on this page."
+status: live