3 ms·
>Redis is really reliable (in my experience at least) Redis has been demonstrated[0][1] to lose data under network partitions. This is particularly concerning
by dice 11y ago
>Redis is really reliable (in my experience at least)
Redis has been demonstrated[0][1] to lose data under network partitions. This is particularly concerning when discussing the type of partial failure that GitHub reported.
0: https://aphyr.com/posts/283-jepsen-redis https://aphyr.com/posts/283-jepsen-redis
1: https://aphyr.com/posts/307-jepsen-redis-redux https://aphyr.com/posts/307-jepsen-redis-redux
- obituary_latte 11y agoNot sure how your comment refutes the contention of reliability. Seems to me to be more a condemnation of failures that do happen (which is of course worthy of concern, but irrelevant in a conversation about stability).
- dice 11y agoI am using "reliability" in the sense of RAS[0]. An HA datastore which erroneously ACK's writes has lowered reliability, as there are known cases where it gives incorrect outputs. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability,_availability_and_serviceability_(computing) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability,_availability_and_...
- obituary_latte 11y agoI see. Yeah, more concerning there being errors not based on an "event". Thanks for clarifying; sorry for any confusion.
- nemothekid 11y agoI meant Redis is really reliable as a single instance. If you reread my post I mentioned that Redis doesn't have a decent HA solution.