undefined | Better HN

story

0 pointsacconsta10y ago0 comments

Right, I should add that it was two years ago. My point is that the age of a project has nothing to do with the correctness of its Paxos implementation.

0 comments

cbsmith10y ago

Jepsen's finding wasn't that there was a bug in Paxos. It was in how it handled conflicts.

acconstaOP10y ago

"So you confer with DataStax for a while, and they manage to reproduce and fix the bug: #6029 (Lightweight transactions race render primary key useless), and #5985 (Paxos replay of in progress update is incorrect). You start building patched versions of Cassandra."

"Cassandra lightweight transactions are not even close to correct. Depending on throughput, they may drop anywhere from 1-5% of acknowledged writes–and this doesn’t even require a network partition to demonstrate. It’s just a broken implementation of Paxos. In addition to the deadlock bug, these Jepsen tests revealed #6012 (Cassandra may accept multiple proposals for a single Paxos round) and #6013 (unnecessarily high false negative probabilities)."

That's four bugs independent of the conflict resolution issue.

cbsmith10y ago

Oh LWT's are a mess, indeed. Thankfully, you don't normally need them.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

cbsmith10y ago

Jepsen's finding wasn't that there was a bug in Paxos. It was in how it handled conflicts.

acconstaOP10y ago

That's four bugs independent of the conflict resolution issue.

cbsmith10y ago

Oh LWT's are a mess, indeed. Thankfully, you don't normally need them.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse