'I also don't like the way it deals with netsplits' I actually prefer it. Too often systems out there don't tell you what they do in the event of a netsplit. T

'I also don't like the way it deals with netsplits' I actually prefer it. Too often systems out there don't tell you what they do in the event of a netsplit. They may have marketing copy somewhere that tells you what they try to do, but then you see the Jepsen tests and realize that's a lie, or is naive, or whatever. Mnesia makes no secrets about it. In the event of a partition it stays partitioned, operating as separate nodes. It's up to you to figure out what to do about that. You can grab a Raft implementation to perform leader election, with the tradeoffs that entails. You want it to self-heal and deconflict based on arbitrary logic, for an eventually consistent system? You can do that too. You want to pretend it doesn't happen, stick your fingers in your ears, "LALALALA" until it does and requires manual intervention? That's fine too! What it DOESN'T do is give you a false sense of security while handwaving away the decisions and implementation concerns that were made to determine CAP behavior, which I find pretty much every other distributed data store does. It definitely has pain points in learning it, and it also has some very definite limitations, but as a baked in, minimally biased distributed store, it's a battery I really loved having included.