3 ms·
> you're already well aware that you're building a CP system, and that availability and latency aren't your main concern Assuming you've chosen correctly betwe
by dllthomas 10y ago
> you're already well aware that you're building a CP system, and that availability and latency aren't your main concern
Assuming you've chosen correctly between CP and AP approaches, this tells us that availability and latency aren't as important as consistency. But there's nothing that says they aren't arbitrarily close...
- elvinyung 10y agoYeah, definitely -- I agree that the decision doesn't mean to just to blindly throw away availability optimizations once you've decided that consistency is important. Actually, invoking CAP probably didn't add to my message. What I meant to say is that people don't talk about non-majority quorum commits that much because the interesting part is that the serializability comes with majority/overlapping quorums.
- dllthomas 10y agoAs I read it, the comment you were replying to was still restricting its discussion to overlapping quorums, and merely pointing out that that's not actually synonymous with majority.
- elvinyung 10y agoFair enough :) I guess my mind latched onto the "it still seems under-explored" part and wanted to try and respond to that.