4 ms·

We do know that some databases fare much better than others and that’s useful to many. In your analogy it would be many builders claiming their buildings to be

We do know that some databases fare much better than others and that’s useful to many. In your analogy it would be many builders claiming their buildings to be earthquake proof with only some actually being it. Thanks to Jepsen, customers know, where to buy.

redwood 5y ago
I'm genuinely curious to hear which database is the winner from your perspective based on Jepsen's insight?
- aphyr 5y ago
  If you find out, let me know! Folks are always asking me "What database is best?" and I'm just shuffling my feet and going "Uhhhh, well, systems are really hard to build correctly, there's lots of tradeoffs, you probably want something with a proven replication model under the hood but so much depends on workload and operational characteristics beyond just safety... If you find a database you love please tell me about it because I like hearing people's stories..." FWIW, I think you're raising really good questions in this thread. Qualitative safety is highly contextual, depending on fault model, significance of individual operations, concurrency, throughput, latency demands, operational characteristics, data volume, etc etc., and I try to touch on that in the "Toward a Culture of Safety" section in this report. Hopefully that resonated for you.
  - redwood 5y ago
    I think it's a refreshingly mature section, And my hats off to you for going there. Unfortunately I don't think the typical reader who I really do believe loves Jepsen outrage porn is going there
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
TheDong 5y ago
Note, this analogy is slightly off for using the phrase "some actually being it". jepsen cannot prove "earthquake proof" (correctness). Rather, it would be "Builders claim their buildings are earthquake proof, and jepson was able to show a subset collapse in earthquakes. The rest may or may not be earthquake proof". That's still very valuable. It's really valuable to know when something is wrong. It would be more valuable to know that something is definitely right (correct / "earthquake proof"), but jepsen cannot prove that.

redwood 5y ago

I'm genuinely curious to hear which database is the winner from your perspective based on Jepsen's insight?

aphyr 5y ago
If you find out, let me know! Folks are always asking me "What database is best?" and I'm just shuffling my feet and going "Uhhhh, well, systems are really hard to build correctly, there's lots of tradeoffs, you probably want something with a proven replication model under the hood but so much depends on workload and operational characteristics beyond just safety... If you find a database you love please tell me about it because I like hearing people's stories..." FWIW, I think you're raising really good questions in this thread. Qualitative safety is highly contextual, depending on fault model, significance of individual operations, concurrency, throughput, latency demands, operational characteristics, data volume, etc etc., and I try to touch on that in the "Toward a Culture of Safety" section in this report. Hopefully that resonated for you.
- redwood 5y ago
  I think it's a refreshingly mature section, And my hats off to you for going there. Unfortunately I don't think the typical reader who I really do believe loves Jepsen outrage porn is going there
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

TheDong 5y ago

Note, this analogy is slightly off for using the phrase "some actually being it". jepsen cannot prove "earthquake proof" (correctness). Rather, it would be "Builders claim their buildings are earthquake proof, and jepson was able to show a subset collapse in earthquakes. The rest may or may not be earthquake proof". That's still very valuable. It's really valuable to know when something is wrong. It would be more valuable to know that something is definitely right (correct / "earthquake proof"), but jepsen cannot prove that.