[erlang-questions] is there anything wrong with global?

Sean Cribbs sean@REDACTED
Sun Dec 28 20:39:33 CET 2014

Global registration is inherently a consensus problem, and thus will have
problems with liveness, as you've discovered. I can't speak to the
implementation of the 'global' module, but I would suspect it is not
partition-tolerant. Is there a way you can reconfigure your application to
have locally-registered processes (one-per-node), or not require a single
distribution point?

There is also some work done by my colleague Chris Meiklejohn for
eventually-consistent (and partition-tolerant) process groups, if you don't
require a single authoritative process:

On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 5:36 AM, 289602744 <289602744@REDACTED> wrote:

> These days,I found global did not work well.
> I have hundreds of nodes,and these nodes are connected with each other.
> But on some nodes, I can't get a process's global registered name with
> global:whereis_name, althrough I can get the node info by
> net_kernel:node_info/1
> I didnot find a way to resolve this problem. Unless I unregister that
> process's name and then register the name again, and then, I can get the
> global name by global:whereis_name/1.
> Is there anything wrong with global? with so many nodes, I can't
> unregister and then register a process name every time I find global return
> me an undefined.
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

Sean Cribbs <sean@REDACTED>
Sr. Software Engineer
Basho Technologies, Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20141228/0985be2a/attachment.htm>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list