Categorizing How Distributed Databases Utilize Consensus Algorithms
(medium.com)
Distributed databases generally fall into two camps when it comes to architectures for maintaining high availability (HA) [1]. Both architectures are used by many successful production systems, but each has very different trade-offs. I couldn’t find anyone who had studied these trade-offs, which is what motivated this article. I don’t know of standard/well-known names for the two HA approaches, so I’m going to refer to them as “Consensus for Metadata” (CfM) and “Consensus for Data” (CfD).
Distributed databases generally fall into two camps when it comes to architectures for maintaining high availability (HA) [1]. Both architectures are used by many successful production systems, but each has very different trade-offs. I couldn’t find anyone who had studied these trade-offs, which is what motivated this article. I don’t know of standard/well-known names for the two HA approaches, so I’m going to refer to them as “Consensus for Metadata” (CfM) and “Consensus for Data” (CfD).