Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ORDTs and causal trees - comparison (feature- & speed- wise) #6

Open
dumblob opened this issue Oct 13, 2021 · 1 comment
Open

ORDTs and causal trees - comparison (feature- & speed- wise) #6

dumblob opened this issue Oct 13, 2021 · 1 comment

Comments

@dumblob
Copy link

dumblob commented Oct 13, 2021

I see you're a long-time expert on CRDTs and such. So it's highly probable you'll be already familiar with this.

Nevertheless let me ask what you think about "ORDT"s when compared to the CRDTs implemented here in diamond-types?

About 3 years ago an article about ORDTs (and Causal Trees) explained a (rather highly successfull) attempt to solve the bunch of the hard problems I see diamond-types is trying to tackle. Including generalization for other data types (maybe even hierarchical ones).

I'm also highly interested in the pruning (space & bandwidth) & reconstruction (speed) strategies. Could you elaborate on how that's (meant to be - in case it's pluggable/configurable) solved in diamond-types?

I myself thought about a hybrid strategy I outlined in HigherOrderCO/Kind#167 (comment) (compare it to automerge/automerge#253 ).

Btw. there seem to be some example implementations of ORDTs - e.g. https://github.com/courajs/referent .

@josephg
Copy link
Owner

josephg commented Nov 15, 2021

Oooh very cool! Sorry - for some reason issue notifications here are off. I'm not familiar with ORDTs at all. I'll take a look at some of those links. Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants