on CAP

The “CAP theorem” is often presented as something deep and hard to understand, and then discussed in confusing terms, to make sure it is hard to understand.  Really, it’s almost common sense – eg, if you have a partition, you have to give up availability or consistency.  Anyone familiar with, eg, drbd/split-brain/STONITH knows all about this.

I was reading a bit about it (again), and I use the sneer quotes on “theorem” because I think that the “proof” is really just adding some mathematical terms to the mix and restating it – QED.  (If this is considered the proof – “Brewer’s Conjecture and the Feasibility of Consistent, Available, Partition-Tolerant Web Services” .)  “Conjecture” doesn’t seem right either.  Maybe CAP observation?

It’s refreshing to find an update written by Eric Brewer (the originator) in 2012, “CAP Twelve Years Later: How the “Rules” Have Changed“.  It’s very readable (down-to-earth), interesting, and informative.  I recommend it to anyone interested in the subject who hasn’t already read it.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: