3 ms·
As far as I can tell, Vitess still has trouble with cross-server transactions and distributed locking. Presumably something "vastly more scalable" could work ar
by WJW 5y ago
As far as I can tell, Vitess still has trouble with cross-server transactions and distributed locking. Presumably something "vastly more scalable" could work around this.
The Spanner team noticeably put out https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/databases/inside-cloud-spanner-and-the-cap-theorem https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/databases/inside-clou... a few years back, which tl;drs that they managed to get a reliable enough network that partitions don't really happen anymore and so you can get both C _and_ A from the CAP theorem. I don't think that Vitess is quite at that level, especially since you can self-host it and thus the devs don't have such network-level uptime guarantees.
- vp8989 5y agoAre cross-server transactions scalable? Would anyone architect a system that did them en masse unless they absolutely 100% had to? I am just speculating here but I doubt that YouTube migrated to Spanner so that they could do cross-server transactions. I would think consolidating the Ops burden into the GCP org and also serving as a trophy "customer" were higher on the list of reasons. But again, just speculating...
- derekperkins 5y agoYeah, Google policy was to migrate everything to Spanner, not a technical decision. > Are cross-server transactions scalable? Would anyone architect a system that did them en masse unless they absolutely 100% had to? As a long time Vitess user and contributor/maintainer, this perfectly describes the issue. Minimal effort has been put into solving cross shard / 2PC transactions because a well designed system rarely needs it.
- ksec 5y agoI guess people from PlanetScale will know. Not sure if they are reading the thread.