英文:
Can raft guarantee correctness by not committing no-op logs?
问题
I have a question: the no-op operation is only mentioned in the raft paper in the optimization section of 8. However, there is mention of no-op logs to prevent "ghost recurrence," but this is not mentioned in the author's paper (poorly thought out?). So my question is, without read optimization, i.e., without no-op either, can raft still be correct?
I am not sure if I have made my question clear.
I have read many articles, but they say different things.
update:
I am sorry that this question did not give as much contextual information as possible.
But I have found the answer so far, in short: no read optimizations, i.e., all read operations go into the log, and not committing the no-op log also ensures that the raft is correct.
英文:
I have a question: the no-op operation is only mentioned in the raft paper in the optimization section of 8. However, there is mention of no-op logs to prevent "ghost recurrence", but this is not mentioned in the author's paper (poorly thought out?). So my question is, without read optimisation, i.e. without no-op either, can raft still be correct?
I am not sure if I have made my question clear.
I have read many articles but they say different things
update:
I am sorry that this question did not give as much contextual information as possible.
But I have found the answer so far, in short: no read optimizations, i.e. all read operations go into the log, and not committing the no-op log also ensures that the raft is e correct.
答案1
得分: 0
我认为我知道我在说什么，所以让我们从这样的结论开始，即即使没有读取优化和不提交无操作，草案仍将正常工作。"幽灵重复"的背景是在没有提交无操作的情况下进行了读取优化，因此它出现了。
英文:
I think I know what I'm talking about, so let's start with the conclusion that draft will still work correctly without read optimization and without committing the no-op.
The background of the "ghost recurrence" is that the read optimization is done without committing the no-op, so it appears.
通过集体智慧和协作来改善编程学习和解决问题的方式。致力于成为全球开发者共同参与的知识库，让每个人都能够通过互相帮助和分享经验来进步。
评论