3 ms·
It's really fun watching you turn into such a pretzel that you want to somehow get around the CAP theorem and/or go back to the days of monopoly exchanges all t
by harryh 13y ago
It's really fun watching you turn into such a pretzel that you want to somehow get around the CAP theorem and/or go back to the days of monopoly exchanges all to get away from the horrible evil of a cost for liquidity of less than 0.1%.
Don't miss the forest for the trees.
- AnthonyMouse 13y agoCiting the CAP theorem as a reason not to have a distributed system is like citing Arrow's Impossibility Theorem as a reason not to have a representative democracy. Proving the impossibility of a platonic ideal doesn't tell you anything about whether one imperfect system is superior to another in practice. And you can't hand wave away the fact that the implications of the CAP theorem are minimal on a distributed system with a high level of interconnect redundancy. If you can ensure with high probability that there will not be a partition in the network then you don't need partition tolerance. If against all odds you have a partition anyway then you lose availability, but that isn't a characteristic unique to the CAP theorem or distributed systems -- any system will lose availability if enough redundant components fail simultaneously.
- hft_throwaway 13y agoExchange gateways fail, network lines fail. This happens all the time. In the current system I can still trade if NASDAQ goes down.