News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The Limits of the CAP Theorem. Parent comment

Re:The Limits of the CAP Theorem by YZF on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @01:14PM (#14647247)
If a partitioned node can serve reads and the other nodes can serve writes then you must be reading stale data though.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Limits of the CAP Theorem by falcolas on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @01:48PM (#14647552)
Writes also require the lease, so no data can be written until the lease expires.

Writes becoming unavailable during a partition is a reasonable solution for a CP system.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Limits of the CAP Theorem by Groxx on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @01:44PM (#14647521)
Yeah, that outcome seems pretty straightforward...

It's probably not hard to require that writes (which require a majority) also require the lease-holder to ack the write, which seems like it'd solve this. It's a bit odd that they don't mention anything like this, but it is a fairly short blog post.

A bit of lazy browsing didn't lead me to any more detailed descriptions of how it handles partitions. Anyone else know?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Limits of the CAP Theorem by falcolas on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @01:49PM (#14647566)
Writes can only get issued from the partition holder, in addition to reads. I had to dig into the documentation links to find the design doc on github, which detailed this behavior.
[ Parent | on HN ]