| ▲ | gyesxnuibh 4 hours ago | |||||||||||||
Having run a fleet of 100s of etcd clusters for 10000s of rps, and the fact that upstream runs tests similar to antithesis and recently partnered with antithesis [0], and jepsen has tested it long ago as well [1]. Etcd's raft algorithm is fine. Someone even did a TLA+ proof on it in the last couple years[2]. Yes there was a correctness issue a few years ago but otherwise the person you're replying to doesn't know what they're talking about. Also those bugs have nothing to do with the raft implementation, but instead the state machine implemented on top. 0: https://etcd.io/blog/2025/autonomus_testing_with_antithesis/ | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | iscoelho an hour ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||
"there was a correction issue" is downplaying it. Etcd is truly the worst example of Raft. Etcd corruption and loss of quorum is extremely common in practice and the GitHub issues sit for years. The design is simple, the performance is modest, yet it still has still never been reliable, despite being marketed as so. I can't speak to whether this is specifically due to their Raft implementation, but I'd argue the entire codebase is over-engineered and questionable. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | cobbzilla 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||
Is the correctness of its implementation of the algorithm unaffected by bugs in this state machine? Maybe I missed something. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||