Edits to Pgd/5/consistency/crdt/docs 287 PR5928 #6076
Conversation
| @@ -138,10 +140,9 @@ SELECT id, counter FROM crdt_delta_example WHERE id = 1; | |||
| (1 row) | |||
| ``` | |||
|
|
|||
| With a regular `integer` column, the result is `2`. But when you update the row with a delta CRDT counter, you start with the OLD row version, make a NEW row version, and send both to the remote node. There, compare them with the version found there (e.g., the LOCAL version). Standard CRDTs merge the NEW and the LOCAL version, while delta CRDTs compare the OLD and NEW versions and apply the delta | |||
| With a regular `integer` column, the result is `2`. But when you update the row with a delta CRDT counter, you start with the OLD row version, make a NEW row version, and send both to the remote node. There, compare them with the version found there (for example, the LOCAL version). Standard CRDTs merge the NEW and the LOCAL version. Delta CRDTs compare the OLD and NEW versions and apply the delta | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are the u/c words here being used for emphasis or is this referring to something appears in code? If emphasis, we don't use all caps for this purpose or really any kind of emphasis, and I would lower case them. If referring to something that appears in the code, that's fine.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@djw-m do you happen to know the answer to this question? I am not sure if this is from code or not, as I am not familiar enough with this content.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
They are being used to label the concepts of NEW, OLD, and LOCAL in reference to rows. Lowercasing them will make this somewhat harder to parse. These aren't code but they do need a labelling emphasis and upper-case is all we have.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Okay, will leave.
| @@ -20,22 +20,26 @@ The main disadvantage is that you can't reset this value reliably in an asynchro | |||
|
|
|||
| !!! Note | |||
| Implementing more complicated operation-based types by creating custom data types is possible, storing the state and the last operation. (Every change is decoded and transferred, so multiple | |||
| operations aren't needed). But at that point, the main benefits (simplicity, reuse of existing data types) are lost without gaining any advantage compared to state-based types (for example, still no capability to reset) except for the space requirements. (A per-node state isn't needed.) | |||
| operations aren't needed.) But at that point, the main benefits (simplicity, reuse of existing data types) are lost and no advantage gained compared to state-based types except for the space requirements. (A per-node state isn't needed.) For example, there's still no ability to reset. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please check this edit.I was trying to break up a long sentence and too many parentheticals, and I wasn't 100% sure I got this right.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it missing an "is"?
operations aren't needed.) But at that point, the main benefits (simplicity, reuse of existing data types) are lost and no advantage is gained compared to state-based types except for the space requirements. (A per-node state isn't needed.) For example, there's still no ability to reset.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are you sure? If you take out the phrase "the main benefits...are lost", the sentence becomes "But at that point no advantage gained compared to state-based types except for the space requirements..." I believe the way "and" is functioning there it requires the "is" to make the sentence valid. ChatGPT agrees and says it is the only way to ensure subject/verb agreement.
|
@jpe442 Overall this looked really great editorially. Most significant edits were for long sentences and overuse of parentheses. In some cases, commas would do just as well. In others, they made the sentence hard to follow. Generally, parentheticals reduce readability. I did have a handful of queries, mostly to verify that my edit was correct. |
|
@jpe442 Please review so I can get this merged. Thank you! |
|
@djw-m @piano35-edb @jpe442 Thanks for the useful feedback. This should be ready to approve now. Thanks! |
Co-authored-by: Dj Walker-Morgan <[email protected]>
djw-m
force-pushed
the
docs/edits_to_pgd_pr5928
branch
from
b52e969
to
aca03e0
Compare
* Edits to Pgd/5/consistency/crdt/docs 287 PR5928 * Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Dj Walker-Morgan <[email protected]> --------- Co-authored-by: Dj Walker-Morgan <[email protected]>
* Edits to Pgd/5/consistency/crdt/docs 287 PR5928 * Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Dj Walker-Morgan <[email protected]> --------- Co-authored-by: Dj Walker-Morgan <[email protected]>
What Changed?