You Keep Using That Word: Asynchronous And Interprocess Comms - Sam Newman - NDC London 2024

This talk was recorded at NDC London in London, England. #ndclondon #ndcconferences #developer #softwaredeveloper
Attend the next NDC conference near you:
ndcconferences.com
ndclondon.com/
Subscribe to our RUclips channel and learn every day:
/@NDC
Follow our Social Media!
/ ndcconferences
/ ndc_conferences
/ ndc_conferences
#architecture #technical #computing
When it comes to distributed computing, one of the perennial topics comes down to how different services should communicate. Working out the relative merits of specific technical approaches can become a complex affair however, so we often reach for categorisation to simplify our work. Often, the discussion around inter-process communication hinges on what on the face of it seems to be a simple decision: Synchronous or Asynchronous.

[@programmer1356]

Consistency in a transaction, as far as I can see, has no meaning at all, let alone a mathematical one. It appears to me that it was only added to turn AID into ACID so that things could pass the ACID test. Atomic, Isolated, and Durable all have meanings that are easy to explain. I have never seen a description, let alone a definition, of Consistency that did not boil down to anything other than a tautology - "It's consistent iff it's consistent."

[@edgeeffect]

Take it down enough layers of abstraction and you'll see your so-called synchronous process is asynchronous anyway.