8 ms·

I always cringe a bit when people point to papers[0] when it comes to software that has is supposed to have real world usage. Just because a paper described a s

by rb2k_ 14y ago

I always cringe a bit when people point to papers[0] when it comes to software that has is supposed to have real world usage. Just because a paper described a system that handles distributed transactions well doesn't mean that this software exists or will be anywhere near usable in the next 5 years. Even if they are, only very few papers actually talk about a system that is already in production use. The few that do (bigtable, dynamo) usually are great though. 0: http://cs-www.cs.yale.edu/homes/dna/papers/calvin-sigmod12.pdf http://cs-www.cs.yale.edu/homes/dna/papers/calvin-sigmod12.p...

zeit_geist 14y ago
The paper describes a system that is a library which adds distributed transactions to effectively every data store available (distributed and non-distributed). I see no reason why this technology should not be available really soon given the broad applicability.
- rb2k_ 14y ago
  The main reason: it's academia and they have already written the paper :)
wmf 14y ago
AFAIK the scalable SQL work from the 1980s was actually shipped by Tandem.
- zeit_geist 14y ago
  for your reading pleasure, please take a look at this paper: http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/tandem/TR-85.6.pdf http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/tandem/TR-85.6.pdf what they describe there basically is the current state of affairs: different database technology for different purposes (in-memory, hierarchical and journal). I love the paper for it shows how things do actually not change.
- zeit_geist 14y ago
  (re that Tandem paper: it's IMS / a hierarchical DB that they describe though)
  - wmf 14y ago
    I'm not sure what you're referring to; Jim Gray's work looks pretty relational to me. http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/gray/papers/Benchmark_NS2_TR_89.4.pdf http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/gray/papers/Be... is just one example.

by rb2k_ 14y ago

zeit_geist 14y ago

The paper describes a system that is a library which adds distributed transactions to effectively every data store available (distributed and non-distributed). I see no reason why this technology should not be available really soon given the broad applicability.

rb2k_ 14y ago
The main reason: it's academia and they have already written the paper :)

wmf 14y ago

AFAIK the scalable SQL work from the 1980s was actually shipped by Tandem.

zeit_geist 14y ago
for your reading pleasure, please take a look at this paper: http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/tandem/TR-85.6.pdf http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/tandem/TR-85.6.pdf what they describe there basically is the current state of affairs: different database technology for different purposes (in-memory, hierarchical and journal). I love the paper for it shows how things do actually not change.
zeit_geist 14y ago
(re that Tandem paper: it's IMS / a hierarchical DB that they describe though)
- wmf 14y ago
  I'm not sure what you're referring to; Jim Gray's work looks pretty relational to me. http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/gray/papers/Benchmark_NS2_TR_89.4.pdf http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/gray/papers/Be... is just one example.