Availability would be what is sacrificed in the advent that a node is partitioned away from the main network.
66 karma · joined July 1, 2018
Availability would be what is sacrificed in the advent that a node is partitioned away from the main network.
There's little insight from what I've seen in the database market as to what people really want the most out of a database, or what makes a database "appealing" to people apart from its reputation from being time-tested.
There's been a pretty interesting development from what I've seen on annual licensing fees for enterprise features, with the code open-sourced.
The tradeoff is slower writes (there are ways to make it so that the more nodes you replicate across, write latency won't be affected!).
Reads will scale linearly for the more nodes you replicate across.
So, the novelty in some sense is fast replication of data in a masterless fashion (without any leader such as, for example in Raft or Paxos).
If this protocol was surprisingly simple (which dumbs down the complexity of the software significantly), would you pay for this sort of database?
For some data, look into orphan blocks: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/orphaned-blocks
There existing n forks, even at a bare minimum of 3 forks of the same height is very common, especially if you consider how many miners there are in the entirety of the Bitcoin network.
We're open to integrating with best practices in a manner that makes the library more secure, and everyone happy.
To simplify it out, the resource attestation model allows one to bind a virtual currency to some amount of computational time and resources.
It allows users to securely rent away their smart devices when they're idle to developers, researchers, startups, and enterprises who really need large amounts of compute power for cheap prices.