Jepsen: Radix DLT 1.0-Beta.35.1

Post by wmf » Sat, Feb 05, 2022, 7:59 PM UTC

bogomipz wrote: post #28

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #27

OH YEAH JEPSEN IS TEARING APART CRYPTO!!!! Aphyr is the best. No matter your fave distributed tech and all it's CAP-don't-matter stuff, he shows that... CAP does very much matter and it's really hard. Cassandra? Kafka? MongoDB (bwahahahah)? It's all got edge cases. He should be getting paid a million bucks a year by various auditing/accounting firms and the FTC/SEC for validating crypto claims. It would be a massive…

Jepsen is most certainly not "tearing apart crypto" nor is that even remotely the intention of this post. From the very first paragraph: >"This work was funded by Radix Tokens (Jersey) Limited, and conducted in collaboration with RDX Works Ltd ..." The post also links to RDX Works Ltd's blog post on this collaboration. Also in the first paragraph.

Post by raphlinus » Sat, Feb 05, 2022, 8:05 PM UTC

wmf wrote: post #41

bogomipz wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jepsen is most certainly not "tearing apart crypto" nor is that even remotely the intention of this post. From the very first paragraph: >"This work was funded by Radix Tokens (Jersey) Limited, and conducted in collaboration with RDX Works Ltd ..." The post also links to RDX Works Ltd's blog post on this collaboration. Also in the first paragraph.

That's the best part: they paid him to throw such savage shade on their blockchain. One transaction per second, one million transactions per second, what's the difference? It's just the roadmap, man.

Post by Rapzid » Sat, Feb 05, 2022, 8:17 PM UTC

redwood wrote: post #39

belter wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although I agree with your point, on language and its ambiguity, I would argue that is a different claim of the one you made above, and that I replied to. When he demonstrated that Riak was dropping 30-70% of writes, even with the strongest consistency settings, or that Mongo had multiple scenarios of data loss, we are not talking about the subtleties of the English idiom

But the contrived nature of Jepsen tests is so different than the real world. In the real world no system behaves exactly the same as it was designed to behave; the real world has cosmic rays, earthquakes and everything in between. So no statement about a software system can ever be simply accepted as a fundamental fact and so to prove that software systems break is misleading for what most users need to understand a…

Post by Mleekko » Sat, Feb 05, 2022, 8:37 PM UTC

raphlinus wrote: post #43

wmf wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the best part: they paid him to throw such savage shade on their blockchain. One transaction per second, one million transactions per second, what's the difference? It's just the roadmap, man.

Makes you wonder why they ended the collaboration in November and didn't continue to retain him to validate that the new stuff lives up to its claims, doesn't it?

Post by dmitriid » Sat, Feb 05, 2022, 9:01 PM UTC

redwood wrote: post #35

belter wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not what Jepsen demonstrates. Instead it shows systems making claims that are not supported by their implementation and/or algorithms. If you want to take on your claim/suggestion then those systems just have to stop making the claims he is testing for. PS: There is also another trend, that is System claiming they fixed the issues Jepsen finds, without submitting themselves again for analysis...but I digress…

I respectfully disagree. Human language and characteristics around distributed data stores in the real world have inherent ambiguity implicit in them that Jepsen in my view pretends isn't the case. Here's an analogy that may help me communicate how I feel since I realize my message is not landing: Let's say I'm buying a condo in the San Francisco Bay area. And let's say the building that I'm looking to buy in adverti…