TE
ТехЭхо
ГлавнаяТоп за 24 часаНовейшиеЛучшиеВопросыПоказатьВакансии
GitHubTwitter
Главная

ТехЭхо

Платформа технологических новостей, созданная с использованием Next.js, предоставляющая глобальные технологические новости и обсуждения.

GitHubTwitter

Главная

ГлавнаяНовейшиеЛучшиеВопросыПоказатьВакансии

Ресурсы

HackerNews APIОригинальный HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 ТехЭхо. Все права защищены.

A Run of CRDT Posts

11 балловавтор: pfarago3 дня назад

1 comment

motorest2 дня назад
&gt; The algebra of semilattices has a single operator: join. Notably it doesn&#x27;t have any operator that corresponds to read or inspect. In fact, CRDTs as described in the literature provide absolutely no guarantees to readers, so a &quot;proper&quot; CRDT implementation should not allow reads!<p>Perhaps a proper mathematician can weigh in, but for a layman like me this assertion makes no sense at all.<p>A join-semilattice is a class of set characterized by a specific type of order and the support for an operation. If you add additional operations, it just further specializes the type of join semilattice. It&#x27;s properties stay the same, and you just add more of them.<p>Also, there is nothing in a set that prevents it from verifying membership of said set.<p>Nevertheless, let&#x27;s entertain the idea and assume that formally you could not verify membership of a set as it would imply loss of correctness. Let&#x27;s entertain that idea.<p>In practical terms this point would be moot. You could simply copy the current state of a set after each join, call it a realization of the CRDT set or something of the sort, treat it as a snapshot of the CRDT, and keep the original CRDT as a data structure that just supports a join. This realization of the CRDT does not need to be bound to any formal constraint enforced on the CRDT.<p>But that would be silly, wouldn&#x27;t it?