3 ms·
Classic blog from 2010. The idea didn't catch on however, and no one uses these terms. PNUTS is still completely closed source inside Yahoo -- this is because
by ryanobjc 11y ago
Classic blog from 2010. The idea didn't catch on however, and no one uses these terms. PNUTS is still completely closed source inside Yahoo -- this is because PNUTS depends on an internal queuing system.
As for YCSB, it's commonly references and is easily available on github. It hasn't changed much lately, and now with tools like jepsen that focus on correctness as well as performance, YCSB is no longer the preferred testing tool.
- anonetal 11y agoI agree, and I wish the concepts here were more widely adopted. Many people seem to equate low-consistency modes (offered by Dynamo/Cassandra etc) with CAP and guaranteeing availability in presence of network partitions. In practice, network partitions seems much less of a concern and the low-consistency modes are really needed to get reasonable performance/latency instead.
- ryanobjc 11y agoThe concept listed in here is either (a) too complex or (b) not complete enough to provide a full rich mental model. CAP was highly successful because it fits in with an existing meme - 3 things, you can only get 2 of them. It's simple, and easy to apply in a trivial fashion. But CAP theorem doesn't have enough "meat" as an engineering analysis, and doesn't guide your system design. Yes there's a proof, but it doesn't tell you how to balance the 3 concepts and how to directly compare system designs. The thing is that as a descriptive model of how an entire distributed database works, CAP just aint enough. That's why blog posts like https://aphyr.com/posts/313-strong-consistency-models https://aphyr.com/posts/313-strong-consistency-models and concepts of 'linearizability' are very useful.