Skip to main content
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
Source Link

Actor / STM models and database persistence are somewhat orthogonal - you can easily have one without the other, and I think there is a danger of confusing the two.

Achieving Durability (the D in ACID) is extremely complex in a transactional setting, and particularly in a distributed setting where you have actors / processes being co-ordinated by message passing. You get into thorny issues like the Byzantine Generals Problem.

As a result, I think there is always going to be some degree of tailoring the solution to meet your specififc persistence requirements. There are no "one size fits all" solutions.

Worth looking at (Clojure perspective):

Actor / STM models and database persistence are somewhat orthogonal - you can easily have one without the other, and I think there is a danger of confusing the two.

Achieving Durability (the D in ACID) is extremely complex in a transactional setting, and particularly in a distributed setting where you have actors / processes being co-ordinated by message passing. You get into thorny issues like the Byzantine Generals Problem.

As a result, I think there is always going to be some degree of tailoring the solution to meet your specififc persistence requirements. There are no "one size fits all" solutions.

Worth looking at (Clojure perspective):

Actor / STM models and database persistence are somewhat orthogonal - you can easily have one without the other, and I think there is a danger of confusing the two.

Achieving Durability (the D in ACID) is extremely complex in a transactional setting, and particularly in a distributed setting where you have actors / processes being co-ordinated by message passing. You get into thorny issues like the Byzantine Generals Problem.

As a result, I think there is always going to be some degree of tailoring the solution to meet your specififc persistence requirements. There are no "one size fits all" solutions.

Worth looking at (Clojure perspective):

Post Migrated Here from stackoverflow.com (revisions)
Source Link
mikera
  • 20.8k
  • 5
  • 78
  • 80

Actor / STM models and database persistence are somewhat orthogonal - you can easily have one without the other, and I think there is a danger of confusing the two.

Achieving Durability (the D in ACID) is extremely complex in a transactional setting, and particularly in a distributed setting where you have actors / processes being co-ordinated by message passing. You get into thorny issues like the Byzantine Generals Problem.

As a result, I think there is always going to be some degree of tailoring the solution to meet your specififc persistence requirements. There are no "one size fits all" solutions.

Worth looking at (Clojure perspective):