Hi Alen, It is definitely interesting from a view of what has been proven practical in a real world Paxos deployment, though Chubby was explicitly not built for speed. That Paxos is only used for server replication and not by the clients is an important point. I had read the paper assuming all Chubby data was actually stored within the Paxos state which doesn't seem to be the case at all; they communicate via an RPC protocol that seemingly is more like NFS than Paxos.
-Jack On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 10:34:49AM -0600, Alen Peacock wrote: > Google's BigTable uses Chubby, which implements Paxos > (http://labs.google.com/papers/chubby.html), fwiw. > > Alen > http://www.flud.org/ > putting the 'ack!' back in backup since 2004 > > > On 10/1/07, Jack Lloyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Thanks, I started reading that paper last night but hadn't realized it > > included performance results. I was somewhat discouraged after seeing > > "P2's lack of concurrency control and well defined execution semantics > > provided a source difficult bugs and race conditions, and we remain > > uncertain as to wether or not our implementation is robust" in the > > abstract and moved on. > > > > -Jack > > _______________________________________________ > > p2p-hackers mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers > > > _______________________________________________ > p2p-hackers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers _______________________________________________ p2p-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
