Someone else tok ownership of the problem for you and sells you their solution : "The theoretical issue is irrelevant to me". Sure. Also, there's a long list o

Someone else tok ownership of the problem for you and sells you their solution : "The theoretical issue is irrelevant to me". Sure. Also, there's a long list of other things that are probably irrelevant to you. That is, until your provider fails and you need to understand the situation in order to provide a workaround. And slapping "load-balancers" everywhere on your schema is not really a solution, because load-balancers themselves are a distributed system with a state and are subject to CAP, as presented in the schema. > DNS, multi-cast, or some other mechanism directs them towards a healthy load balancer on the healthy side of the partition. "Somehow, something somewhere will fix my shit hopefully". Also, as a sidenote, a few friends would angrily shake their "it's always DNS" cup reading this. edit: reading the rest of the blog and author's bio, I'm unsure whether the author is genuinely mistaken, or whether they're advertising their employer's product.