4 ms·

For distributed systems, the main idea is a centralized write ordering journal that is replayed by individual nodes. Multiple systems write sequentially to the

For distributed systems, the main idea is a centralized write ordering journal that is replayed by individual nodes. Multiple systems write sequentially to the central journal. The journal is simply taking requests like a key value store. The journal is replicated to all the nodes. The nodes read from the journal and performs the complex logic requested.

nine_k 3y ago
If business software practices is not enough of a proof, look at any massive online games. They all use one central server as a source of truth about the game world, and broadcast that state to the clients. Anything a client reports that diverges from the central server view is either corrected, rejected, or becomes a reason to disconnect the client for cheating attempts. If you need strict order, that order should happen in strictly one place. (The universe itself does not support strict order at a distance, as Special Relativity shows.)
- bawolff 3y ago
  Bitcoin: Am I joke to you? Everyone: yes.
  - rusk 3y ago
    Bitcoin is an interesting exception to the above. Issue is latency.
    - nine_k 3y ago
      Latency might be OK. The true price of trustless consensus is proof of work, that is, energy.
      - rusk 3y ago
        > Latency might be okay. Nope. Not for real-time gaming which is the topic at hand. Certainly not at scale. Certainly not at the kind of volume of events that gaming produces.
  - rcxdude 3y ago
    There's no performance gain from bitcoin's approach though. The distributed consensus is there for trustless operation, not performance. It's many orders of magnitude slower (and a few more orders of magnitude more power inefficient!) than just having one server handle it.
  - sfifs 3y ago
    Isn't bitcoin actually eventual consensus determined by increasing unlikelihood of finding a conflicting sequence of hashes?
    - niederman 3y ago
      Yes, although if the consistency is good enough for _payments infrastructure_, it's probably good enough for just about everything.
      - nine_k 3y ago
        If a particualr mechanic part is good enough for a _space ship_, it's probably good enough for just about everything. But its price may be prohibitive.
mjan22640 3y ago
that is server/many clients, not distributed

nine_k 3y ago

If business software practices is not enough of a proof, look at any massive online games. They all use one central server as a source of truth about the game world, and broadcast that state to the clients. Anything a client reports that diverges from the central server view is either corrected, rejected, or becomes a reason to disconnect the client for cheating attempts. If you need strict order, that order should happen in strictly one place. (The universe itself does not support strict order at a distance, as Special Relativity shows.)

bawolff 3y ago
Bitcoin: Am I joke to you? Everyone: yes.
- rusk 3y ago
  Bitcoin is an interesting exception to the above. Issue is latency.
  - nine_k 3y ago
    Latency might be OK. The true price of trustless consensus is proof of work, that is, energy.
    - rusk 3y ago
      > Latency might be okay. Nope. Not for real-time gaming which is the topic at hand. Certainly not at scale. Certainly not at the kind of volume of events that gaming produces.
- rcxdude 3y ago
  There's no performance gain from bitcoin's approach though. The distributed consensus is there for trustless operation, not performance. It's many orders of magnitude slower (and a few more orders of magnitude more power inefficient!) than just having one server handle it.
- sfifs 3y ago
  Isn't bitcoin actually eventual consensus determined by increasing unlikelihood of finding a conflicting sequence of hashes?
  - niederman 3y ago
    Yes, although if the consistency is good enough for _payments infrastructure_, it's probably good enough for just about everything.
    - nine_k 3y ago
      If a particualr mechanic part is good enough for a _space ship_, it's probably good enough for just about everything. But its price may be prohibitive.

mjan22640 3y ago

that is server/many clients, not distributed