Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

For all the crap the DoD gets, this has been a solved problem forever in the military. Even putting aside technical things like the Blue Force Tracker or ABMS that present a global view disseminated to users in the field who also feed information back to the distributed data store, it is simply expected and accepted that data will not be consistent in the presence of sparse network connectivity, which you will inevitably sometimes have, especially in the older days when relying on radio mesh networks or even further back before this was primarily a technological problem when headquarters communicated with forward units via horseback messenger. If the decision point is more critical to get right, you wait until you have reasonable assurance your information is accurate and consistent. If the decision point is more critical to be moved past quickly, then you act on the last known state even though it may no longer be accurate. If it's most important that all units be on the same page, then you act on the last known agreed upon plan, even if some units have newer information. They don't update until they get positive confirmation from headquarters that every unit has received the new information.

Heck, as much as I don't like them, even Facebook got this right last I knew when I still used their app years ago. It never required a network connection. If you weren't actively receiving updates, it just showed you the cached last known feed, accepting that it wasn't up to date. And if you tried to post something, it would just cache that too and wait to send it. They didn't invent eventual consistency, either. It's been a basic operating principle of distributed organizations, especially armies, for thousands of years.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: