Revision as of 11:00, 19 April 2021 edit DavidBenHorin (talk \| contribs) 19 edits →Distributed non-relational databases ← Previous edit		Revision as of 12:42, 3 May 2021 edit undo Stelio (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 853 edits CAP is a theorem, so does not prove; availability or consistency are only compromised on a partitioned database in the case of a network partition failure Next edit →
Line 32: and [[Azure Services Platform\|Microsoft Azure Storage]].<ref>{{cite web\|url=http://www.microsoft.com/windowsazure/features/storage/\|title=Windows Azure Storage\|date=2011-09-16\|access-date=6 November 2011\|url-status=dead\|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111109002826/http://www.microsoft.com/windowsazure/features/storage/\|archive-date=9 November 2011}}</ref> As the ability of arbitrary querying is not as important as the [[availability]], designers of distributed data stores have increased the latter at an expense of consistency. But the high-speed read/write access results in reduced consistency, as it is not possible to ~~have~~guarantee both [[Consistency (database systems)\|consistency]], availability, and partition tolerance of the network, as ~~it has been proven~~stated by the [[CAP theorem]]. ==Peer network node data stores==

Distributed data store: Difference between revisions