News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Apache Geode: Distributed, in-memory database. Parent comment

Re:Apache Geode: Distributed, in-memory database by finnh on Thursday November 19, 2015 @03:57PM (#10597599)
> - Consistency is a must - CA or CP in CAP theorem?

There is no CA. So, they must mean CP.

Remember, kids: if they promise CA, run away.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apache Geode: Distributed, in-memory database by fweespeech on Thursday November 19, 2015 @05:13PM (#10598091)
CA is possible if its read only, essentially, with all updates synchronized when a partition is not present [which is the majority of the time in the real world].
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apache Geode: Distributed, in-memory database by eloff on Thursday November 19, 2015 @06:33PM (#10598468)
It's semantics, but I'd argue if you're read only than you're changing the definition of available.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apache Geode: Distributed, in-memory database by GregChase on Thursday November 19, 2015 @08:33PM (#10599014)
Geode is write-intensive, and generally optimizes for consistency over availability. That being said - there's a lot built into Geode to ensure availability as well.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apache Geode: Distributed, in-memory database by fweespeech on Friday November 20, 2015 @12:19AM (#10599746)
Fair enough but read-only in the event of a network partition is a viable real world use case.
[ Parent | on HN ]