Talks to Watch

"Transactions: myths, surprises and opportunities" by Martin Kleppmann

84K views · Sep 27, 2015 · 41:08 · 2 HN recommenders · 4 mentions · discussed 2018–2023

Martin Kleppmann's Strange Loop talk on database transactions, covering why they were dropped by NoSQL, their reputation for being slow, and newer algorithms that make serializable transactions perform and scale. It touches on consistency, linearizability and the CAP theorem.

Why Hacker News points people here: Recommended as a compact preview of Kleppmann's data systems material, including from his book on the subject.

“I recommend watching this talk from him to give a little glimpse of the book”HN comment, 2019

What Hacker News said 4

RecommendsgeksillaApr 2018

Kleppmann talk on transactions, listed among favorite tech talks

Full comment

Rich Hickey - "simple made easy" link Rob Pike - "concurrency is not parallelism" link Uncle Bob Martin - "future of programming" link Martin Kleppmann - "transactions: myths, surprises and opportunities" this video Simon Brown - "software architecture vs code" link

in “Ask HN: What is your favourite tech talk?” · view on HN
RecommendsredismanMay 2019

“I recommend watching this talk from him to give a little glimpse of the book”

Condensed glimpse of Kleppmann's book content on data systems

Full comment

It's great. Incredibly dense with useful information and it just blows my mind how much knowledge Martin has about the topic. I recommend watching this talk from him to give a little glimpse of the book: this video This is just about a little part of one of the chapters.

in “Ask HN: What overlooked class of tools should a self-taught programmer look into” · view on HN
Cites itvvernDec 2020

Cited for the 'invert the database' idea

Full comment

I mean, I hear you that people do that and it does allow you to avoid needing distributed transactions. When you're stuck with an underlying NoSQL database without transactions, this is the best thing you can do. This is the whole "invert the database" idea that ends up with [1]. I'm arguing that that usage pattern was painful and that if you can have horizontally scalable transaction processing and a stream of events due to committed transactions downstream, you can use that to power correct and easy to reason about materializations as well as asynchronous task processing. Transact to change state. React to state changes. Prosper. [1] this video

Cites itgexahaJan 2023

“you can find talks of Martin Kleppmann on youtube about consistency guarantees”

Kleppmann talk on consistency guarantees

Full comment

jepsen.io has a neat diagram of various consistency models - link also, you can find talks of Martin Kleppmann on youtube about consistency guarantees, e. g., this video

in “UC Berkeley researchers set new visions for making CRDT data stores practical [pdf]” · view on HN