logoalt Hacker News

tomjakubowskiyesterday at 8:11 PM2 repliesview on HN

I don't think it's true that distributed and decentralized mean the same thing. A hub and spoke rail system is centralized, but it's still a distributed system, if it has multiple trains running concurrently.* A distributed system has to coordinate somehow, and a single central DB is one way of doing it.

*: edit, maybe a better example here is a rail system with a single central dispatcher is centralized but may still be distributed


Replies

munk-ayesterday at 8:26 PM

In fact - if you're building a very large distributed system the goal is usually to shrink that centralized component to the smallest and most robust surface you can. If the system is well designed it is amazing just how much consistency power you can get from a tiny component of centralization.

There are always tradeoffs of course, but building a truly decentralized system requires some really difficult compromises to correctness. The two general's problem is a great piece of reading on this topic - distribution always requires compromises in general, but to fully remove an authority on truth gets quite tricky.

show 2 replies
KraftyOneyesterday at 8:18 PM

Exactly! It's a distributed system, with many processes performing work in parallel, with a central database as a coordination point, used as little as possible. A mutex wouldn't get quite the same performance :)

show 1 reply