Apologies, as usual with the CAP theorem, I made an error here.
Apologies, as usual with the CAP theorem, I made an error here. The Gilbert/Lynch paper specifically says that availability only counts for servers that actually receive requests, so if all the network links in the world are cut, you will still be available by this definition. So you can ignore the last two sentences of my first paragraph. That paragraph should say: First, in the "The same application with an Eventually Consistent store", you don't actually define the semantics of the system, so there is no way to say how it relates to CAP. Eventually consistent stores, like the original Dynamo, are designed to be AP systems, which is why they have things like read-repair. If all your nodes have failed, or all network links have been cut, you are available because there are no requests to which to respond. Otherwise, you can always get a response, and are therefore available, but that response may not be the "latest" response, so it may not be consistent (see Herlihy on Linearizability for the full definition here). Apologies for adding confusion here.
Posted by liberalbias on Apr 24, 2015, 8:17 PM
Tags
Related issues
- (1) Because it doesn't actually solve the problem.
- Every time fossil comes up, I hear this same issue - "why is there no rebase?" And honestly, I've never been able to get this argument.
- My biggest problem with running local LLMs on my M4 Max/128GB RAM is the prefill latency.
- Biggest problem with httpx I see is authors sanity https://github.com/encode/httpx/discussions/3784 .
- There aren't many situations today that make one think: Why doesn't this business have a website?
- > IAM can stay MS That's leaving the most critical component still with a US company.
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.7,000 issues0 comments
hackernews (Network)
(1) Because it doesn't actually solve the problem.
Every time fossil comes up, I hear this same issue - "why is there no rebase?" And honestly, I've never been able to get this argument.
My biggest problem with running local LLMs on my M4 Max/128GB RAM is the prefill latency.
Biggest problem with httpx I see is authors sanity https://github.com/encode/httpx/discussions/3784 .
There aren't many situations today that make one think: Why doesn't this business have a website?
> IAM can stay MS That's leaving the most critical component still with a US company.
I am very petty about this one bug and have a very old axe to grind that this reminded me of!
Not just the edge router.
Apologies, as usual with the CAP theorem, I made an error here.
Apologies, as usual with the CAP theorem, I made an error here. The Gilbert/Lynch paper specifically says that availability only counts for servers that actually receive requests, so if all the network links in the world are cut, you will still be available by this definition. So you can ignore the last two sentences of my first paragraph. That paragraph should say: First, in the "The same application with an Eventually Consistent store", you don't actually define the semantics of the system, so there is no way to say how it relates to CAP. Eventually consistent stores, like the original Dynamo, are designed to be AP systems, which is why they have things like read-repair. If all your nodes have failed, or all network links have been cut, you are available because there are no requests to which to respond. Otherwise, you can always get a response, and are therefore available, but that response may not be the "latest" response, so it may not be consistent (see Herlihy on Linearizability for the full definition here). Apologies for adding confusion here.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.