đź“… Original date posted:2015-11-14
đź“ť Original message:On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 1:02 AM, Peter R <peter_r at gmx.com> wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> Like you said, the issue with using more than one database technology is not that one node would prove that Block X is valid while the another node proves that Block X is NOT valid. Instead, the problem is that one node might say “valid” while the other node says “I don’t know.”
Sometimes errors are such that you can catch them (if you're super
vigilant and know an error is even possible in that case)-- and
indeed, in that case you can get a "I don't know, something is
wrong.", other times errors are undetectable.
> In reality, this fear is largely unfounded.
I cited an issue in leveldb (before we used it) where it would
silently fail to return records.
> If the software was written with the philosophy that tracking consensus was more important than bug-for-bug compatibility, it would have returned an exception rather than “invalid.”
That invariant requires the software to be completely free of errors
that would violate it.
Gregory Maxwell [ARCHIVE] /
npub1f2…crwet
2023-06-07 17:44:52
in reply to nevent1q…a9m2
Author Public Key
npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwetPublished at
2023-06-07 17:44:52Event JSON
{
"id": "e3aec0c783d575c59ab7bc22f6ed3090b644905e5f308690790663dbd9ff2bd2",
"pubkey": "4aa6cf9aa5c8e98f401dac603c6a10207509b6a07317676e9d6615f3d7103d73",
"created_at": 1686159892,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"1210ebe800165dee2ccc94a44db020accc39bb94ffc3ab7a1da78a399947e644",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"ad8af0489ace314eb7885c2743c10ac6e611c84d88690d8165e55288837611be",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"6185f02289f12c01c6f7c80cdc0331a01eae9c6356f228be12efdb7fb395bc19"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-11-14\n📝 Original message:On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 1:02 AM, Peter R \u003cpeter_r at gmx.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e Hi Greg,\n\u003e\n\u003e Like you said, the issue with using more than one database technology is not that one node would prove that Block X is valid while the another node proves that Block X is NOT valid. Instead, the problem is that one node might say “valid” while the other node says “I don’t know.”\n\nSometimes errors are such that you can catch them (if you're super\nvigilant and know an error is even possible in that case)-- and\nindeed, in that case you can get a \"I don't know, something is\nwrong.\", other times errors are undetectable.\n\n\u003e In reality, this fear is largely unfounded.\n\nI cited an issue in leveldb (before we used it) where it would\nsilently fail to return records.\n\n\u003e If the software was written with the philosophy that tracking consensus was more important than bug-for-bug compatibility, it would have returned an exception rather than “invalid.”\n\nThat invariant requires the software to be completely free of errors\nthat would violate it.",
"sig": "52439cfadcd6d9cf617ced64565a7d1f6a94d6d35bc1b3e1d2826075041e8c68791757b4f729576a7d02752796716beb780a1473da059d5f57e1e50afc8364a6"
}