4 ms·
>and release products that let you do things "the old way" while hiding the details in an abstraction. However, by 'abstracting' this away, you're not being fo
by hueving 10y ago
>and release products that let you do things "the old way" while hiding the details in an abstraction.
However, by 'abstracting' this away, you're not being forced to think about failure domains. If there is ever a massive country-wide connectivity break to the wider Internet (feasible for lots of people inside censored countries), you'll be pretty pissed when you can't use the DB services for your servers in the Google-local datacenter that you still have connectivity to because it can't get quorum.
- jedberg 10y agoExactly my point. I would say I personally prefer the Amazon way of forcing you to think about these things.
- boulos 10y agoI'd encourage you to read the F1 paper and the Spanner paper if you haven't already. The big thing that stood out to me is that Google started that way (with BigTable) where you'd roll your own availability and transactions. It didn't go well. That's the motivation behind both Spanner and F1: take the experience of how painful it is to do transactions on a Regional or Global level, and never make individual teams do it again. I see it a bit like "Don't roll your own crypto". Clearly some people are exempted from it, but you better be able to tell me why you get an exception. Disclosure: I work on Google Cloud and want you to pay for Spanner :).
- dietrichepp 10y agoCloud Spanner is currently a regional service, not a global service. So you would only lose availability for failures within the region.