[cap-talk] How desirable / feasible is a persistent OCAP language?

James A. Donald jamesd at echeque.com
Thu Jul 17 21:25:25 CDT 2008

ihab.awad at gmail.com wrote:
 > What if one were to adopt the same sort of
 > architecture, but consider the "database" to be --
 > well -- a large vat with relatively simple semantics.
 > Upgrade it all in one big turn and we're done, and
 > write its clients such that they can be "rebooted"
 > easily. Maybe orthogonal persistence is a sharp knife
 > to be used wisely.

If any state needs to be consistent and persistent, that
state can only be in one place.  If one finds one has
distributed state that needs to be consistent between
nodes, one is in deep trouble.  Sooner or later, to
maintain consistency, will have to end persistence,
shutting down the whole shebang and starting over.

More information about the cap-talk mailing list