2 ms·
Because the incidence and cost of mistaken under-consistency are both generally higher than those of mistaken over-consistency—especially at the scale where peo
by riwsky 11mo ago
Because the incidence and cost of mistaken under-consistency are both generally higher than those of mistaken over-consistency—especially at the scale where people would need to rely on managed off-the-shelf services like aurora instead of being able to build their own.
- wowamit 11mo agoI would be hesitant to generalise that. There is an inherent tension with its impact on the larger availability of your system. We can't analyse the effect in isolation.
- roncesvalles 11mo agoMost systems can tolerate downtime but not data incorrectness. Also, eventual consistency is a bit of a misnomer because it implies that the only cost you’re paying is staleness. In reality these systems are “never consistent” because you often give up guarantees like full serializability making you susceptible to outright data corruption.