Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

teleclimber

> Making CRDTs consequence-free is ongoing research.

What do you mean by that?

I found possibly related language on this page the other day [0]:

CRDTs are "[t]ypically not suited for editing application with consequent UI."

Can you point me in the right direction? My googling got me nowhere. Thanks.

[0] https://irisate.com/collaborative-editing-solutions-round-up...

View on HN

I dunno about that quote, Treedoc works pretty well.

In general there are tradeoffs to CRDTs and not everyone loves those tradeoffs. As time goes on we find CRDTs that make better tradeoffs.

For example, the earliest examples of CRDT sets grew linearly with the values added to the set, without regard for deletion. For all time. That's a pretty steep cost.

I get it, thank-you.

LSEQ appears to improve upon treedoc in ways, too: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00921633/document

It's not described in the docs, but elswhere [1] in their github repository you can find the note about rga, which is Replicated Growable Array CRDT, that can be used for building indexed linear sequences - shortly speaking arrays of elements with insert/remove semantics.

[1](https://github.com/SyncFree/antidote/blob/842874ca5ecffe947e...)

An efficient implementation of RGA designed for concurrent editing: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2957276.2957300

Reply on news.ycombinator.com