4 ms·
Yes. The point of the post is that with global ACID, distributed ledgers among trusted parties are just regular applications. You can’t do this with eventually
by jchanimal 9y ago
Yes. The point of the post is that with global ACID, distributed ledgers among trusted parties are just regular applications. You can’t do this with eventually consistent databases. What I’m describing is a genuine solution our customers are choosing FaunaDB for. For their distributed ledger requirements, a blockchain is overkill.
- eternalban 9y agoAnd the point of the GP was that that does not address the OP point that it is "just a distributed database"
- jchanimal 9y agoA distributed database with global consistency, which is a new category. FaunaDB (and similar databases) allows a distributed ledger among trusted parties to be “just a database application.”
- hossbeast 9y agoGreat. Just take the word blockchain out of the article, it adds nothing but confusion.
- epistasis 9y agoI disagree, with the number of people pushing blockchain when they just want a distributed ledger, an article like this is quite helpful.
- userpass 9y agoSo you're telling me... it's a distributed database? Global consistency is nothing new.
- pg_is_a_butt 9y agoIf you have many databases all attempting high volume conflicting ACID transactions constantly, it would seem eventually consistent is better than never commit a single transaction.