1. 47
  1.  

  2. 5

    I would recommend this as a good intro, but it crashed halfway through. Good idea, though.

    1. 1

      Do you have any follow up resources? Where is the original paper / implementation?

      1. 1
        1. 1

          When I googled, all I found was:

          https://www.dropbox.com/s/k5u21zgj7oww1eq/Screenshot%202014-01-06%2011.14.07.png

          Personalization fail? Either way, thx!

          1. 1

            You’re right. Surprisingly ungoogleable, given how popular this paper has been lately. Or maybe I’m just in a bubble. :) Posted the fan site as an article link so others will see it.

      2. 1

        It crashed on me too. I tried again and it just crashed somewhere else. :/

      3. 1

        This was excellent. The InfoQ presentation on Raft can also complement this. http://www.infoq.com/presentations/raft

        I wonder how the presentation was made. It looks really attractive.

        1. 1

          Incredibly helpful visualization. It really helped me get a more firm grasp on the whole idea of consensus in a distributed system.

          1. 1

            This is an awesome visualization.

            I haven’t read the paper yet, but it looks like there’s a possible discrepancy in the presentation in the Log Replication section.

            A change is committed as follows:

            1. client sends request to leader
            2. leader appends log, send followers
            3. followers append log, notifies leader
            4. leader commits with >50% followers append, notifies followers of commit
            5. leader responds to client

            However in the +2 example:

            1. client sends request to leader
            2. leader appends log, send followers
            3. followers append log, notifies leader
            4. leader commits with >50% followers append, responds to client
            5. leader notifies followers of commit

            In the second scenario, if leader dies after step 4 then there is an inconsistent state. The client received a 7, but all the followers have a +2 append and no commit. After a timeout the +2 append will be rolled back and there will be a new leader election. However now the client has seen a commit that none of the other nodes have seen.

            1. 1

              I highly recommend reading the paper. Unlike most academic crap, it’s written directly, convincingly, and with a dry sense of humor.