I remember reading Doug Terry's "Replicated Data Consistency Explained Through Baseball" in my distributed systems undergrad course which helped me understand some of the models a little better.
In the context of comp-sci, I'd say it applies to requiring a Strict Serializable consistency model merely because it's easier to reason about it, even if some other model would be a better fit to the problem at hand.
Double plus if you use that model because you don't know of the existence of the others.
In the 70s and 80s it was not uncommon to run across a CS paper whose title was a play on some aphorism or poetic quotation. That playfulness is much less common these days.
For any tool authors, jepsen is invaluable piece <3.
A lot of software in the messaging/storage space has undergone jepsen test and I for one am grateful to Jepsen's author Kyle Kingsbury for his incredible work in setting their expectations correct.
7 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 28.6 ms ] threadhttps://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/...
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/353571-a-foolish-consistenc...
.
Didn't quite get the connection here. Care to elaborate? :)
Double plus if you use that model because you don't know of the existence of the others.
In the 70s and 80s it was not uncommon to run across a CS paper whose title was a play on some aphorism or poetic quotation. That playfulness is much less common these days.
A lot of software in the messaging/storage space has undergone jepsen test and I for one am grateful to Jepsen's author Kyle Kingsbury for his incredible work in setting their expectations correct.