On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn <[email protected]>wrote:
> If you're interested in distributed systems, please read and comment! > I'm interested in distributed systems! :D > I posted an argument for why distributed, end-to-end, two-phase commit > will probably work fine for LAFS's purposes even though it has gained > a well-deserved reputation for "not scaling up to the Internet" in > other contexts. (Hint: the answer is, of course, that we're demanding > less of it than most systems do.) > I guess what I'm unclear on, both after reading this email and your notes on #1755, is what algorithm you want to use for 2PC that you expect to "scale up to the Internet" I think a variant of Paxos is the go-to tool for this use case, and it is most certainly known for scaling only to a small number of nodes. Something I might propose for this use case: have you considered replacing the introducer with something like Zookeeper (or at least supporting it as an alternative), which can provide both a node registry and manage things like distributed locking for you? -- Tony Arcieri
_______________________________________________ tahoe-dev mailing list [email protected] https://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev
