geode-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Udo Kohlmeyer <>
Subject Re: Core tenets of Geode
Date Wed, 28 Nov 2018 21:18:07 GMT
John, I 100% agree with your statements!

We should add that to the list as well...

On 11/28/18 11:54, John Blum wrote:
> 1 more thing...
> Yes, CORRECTNESS is not going to be the glamorous thing.  You cannot market
> it because it is not sexy, not cool, it is simply expected as the bar to
> entry.  No one notices when the system just works as it should.  You will
> not get compliments, no thank you's.  It's just "Business As Usual".  Of
> course, look out things don't work!  You'll hear about those, even when it
> is not your problem.  Anticipation is key, but not at the expense of over
> engineering the problem.  It's fine balance and art to be learned.
> Performance is one where its fast one day but slow the next.  Correctness
> does not take a day off.
> If you can only optimize for 1 thing, opt to be correct.  Users will
> silently be thanking you, especially during the holidays when they don't
> have to worry about keeping the lights on at work.
> + $0.02 more,
> -John
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:42 AM John Blum <> wrote:
>> There is only 1 thing I would add to this list is, above all others...
>> 1. Correctness
>> Of course, this ought to go without saying, but do the right thing,
>> always, even at the peril of all the other things combined.  It is all too
>> easy to focus on the shinny things (e.g. performance, latency, high
>> concurrency), which have external factors (e.g. hardware failures, network
>> issues, resource limitations) beyond the control of the system itself.
>> Correctness has no external factors, especially if the system is designed
>> with resiliency/recovery in mind.  When in doubt, do the simplest thing,
>> less is more, write a test.  If it is hard to test, it is probably wrong,
>> poorly designed, or both.  I cannot count how many times I have been proven
>> wrong simply by writing 1 more test.  If you think it can happen, it will!
>> Finally, by way of example, I want to pick on "performance".  Ooh!  Ah!
>> Shinny!  I hate nothing more than premature optimization.  Unfortunately,
>> performance might have the most external factors out of any of the above
>> things and if you are not correct, then it really does not matter how fast
>> you go if you are going in the wrong direction/doing the wrong thing
>> faster.  You are just magnifying the problem.  Also don't confuse
>> consistency with correctness.  You can be consistently incorrect, too.
>> There are many instances where features/functions are NOT doing the right
>> thing.
>> $0.02,
>> -John
>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:12 AM Udo Kohlmeyer <> wrote:
>>> Hi there Geode dev's.
>>> I'm starting to notice more and more discussions about proposed features
>>> or JIRA tickets, where imo, core Geode tenets are being violated.
>>> Initially I thought that Geode must be lacking core tenets, to guide our
>>> decisions. BUT then I noticed that we do state the on the home page.
>>> I would like to remind everyone working on Geode of the following tenets
>>> which Geode lives and dies by:
>>>   1. Performance
>>>   2. Consistency
>>>   3. Low Latency
>>>   4. High concurrency
>>>   5. Elastic scalability
>>>   6. Reliable transactions
>>>   7. Share-nothing architecture
>>> The reason I am calling this out, is that every decision we make, every
>>> piece of code we write needs to meet and exceed (if possible) these
>>> tenets. IF a solution or feature violates ANY one of the tenets, that is
>>> solution needs to be revised to meet these tenets.
>>> I would like to suggest that in the future we add two more tenets:
>>>   1. Modular
>>>   2. Predictable
>>> Imo, Geode has to be modular. A simple architecture where it is possible
>>> to easily replace modules of the system with more suitable (and greatly
>>> improved) successors.
>>> As for */Predictable/*, Geode needs to be predictable in the following
>>> areas:
>>>    * Latency
>>>    * Error Handling
>>>    * Service contracts
>>> Any thoughts?
>>> --Udo
>> --
>> -John
>> john.blum10101 (skype)

View raw message