4 ms·
There are legitimate reasons to have a CP system and not an AP system, it's obviously application specific. Also over-engineered systems come with their own ris
by qaq 10y ago
There are legitimate reasons to have a CP system and not an AP system, it's obviously application specific. Also over-engineered systems come with their own risks and can experience as much down time as a well setup CP system due to human error stemming from the system's complexity (AWS is a good example).
- zzzcpan 10y agoNASes are not CP systems, they are noCAP systems. They cannot guarantee neither consistency nor availability in the event of network partition.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- rdtsc 10y agoVery good point. Quite often when talking about distributed system, everyone goes to the CAP theorem and automatically assumes if it is not AP, it must CP then. While in reality (and maybe for good reasons) it might be neither.
- qaq 10y agoYou sure can but it seems there are not that many practical applications for distributed system that are not tolerant to partitions.
- qaq 10y agoSetup DRBD on your NAS boxes and you have AP :).