Loading...
Loading...
Browse 3 real-world technical and behavioral interview questions about Eventual consistency. Review scenarios, edge cases, and architectural best practices.
A saga has no rollback. Each step already committed in its own database and was visible to everyone, so you can only run new forward transactions that semantically offset it. Compensations are not atomic, some actions cannot be compensated at all, and compensations themselves fail - so a saga needs idempotent handlers and an ordering rule for irreversible steps.
Accepting writes on both sides means conflicts are inevitable, so the design choice is who resolves them. Last-write-wins discards an edit by clock accident; version vectors detect the conflict and hand it back; CRDTs merge deterministically but only for the operations they model. Use this conflict resolution answer to show the decision, trade-off, and evidence rather than a memorised definition.
An acknowledged write is only guaranteed on the replicas that acknowledged it, so a read served elsewhere can legitimately return the previous version. Locate the staleness - replica, secondary index or cache - then buy read-your-writes for that operation only, and price what it costs during a partition.