Hacker News Reader

I guess if the concern is around atomically committing to the DB and event stream at the same time, you could hang the event stream off the DB using change-data-capture to populate the events.

Ultimately, whenever you are pushing data between systems you can end up with inconsistencies which why it’s important to clearly define systems of record.

View on HN

That's basically what the database would do anyway, so generally, yes (e.g. even with a RDBMS it's internally got some sort of write log, in most cases). That's gonna help a lot!

It doesn't give you any guarantees about "at a given time" consistency, though. Maybe your queue or your event processor got backed up. So how real-time do you need both sides?

These are, of course, problems that people have solved to varying level of satisfaction for most use cases! But I've seen systems built by people who saw the blog post about "have both!" and then didn't think about all these cases and then... it gets messy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com