Upgrade to Pro
— share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …
Speaker Deck
Features
Speaker Deck
PRO
Sign in
Sign up for free
Search
Search
Distributed Elixir
Search
Maciej Kaszubowski
July 07, 2018
Programming
200
0
Share
Embed
Copy iframe code
Copy JS code
Copy link
Start on current slide
Distributed Elixir
Presentation about some of the tools for distributed programming in Elixir
Maciej Kaszubowski
July 07, 2018
More Decks by Maciej Kaszubowski
See All by Maciej Kaszubowski
Error-free Elixir
mkaszubowski
0
460
Modular Design in Elixir (ElixirConf EU 2019)
mkaszubowski
2
920
The Big Ball of Nouns
mkaszubowski
0
150
Modular Design in Elixir
mkaszubowski
1
420
Our three years with Elixir
mkaszubowski
0
290
Concurrency Basics for Elixir
mkaszubowski
0
160
Software Architecture
mkaszubowski
0
170
Let it crash - fault tolerance in Elixir/OTP
mkaszubowski
0
540
CRDTs - The science behind Phoenix Presence
mkaszubowski
2
320
Other Decks in Programming
See All in Programming
「AIで開発し、AIを届ける」をEvalでつなぐ 〜AIネイティブに始めるプロダクト開発の実践〜 / Connecting "Develop with AI, deliver AI" with Eval
rkaga
4
5.3k
キャリア迷子上等 ─ "ない道"は自分で作ればいい
16bitidol
3
2.1k
ローカルLLMでどこまでコードが書けるか -拡張版 / How much code can be written on a local LLM Extended
kishida
11
4.3k
決定論的オーケストレーションの設計と実装 / Design and Implementation of Deterministic Orchestration
nrslib
4
1.4k
JJUG CCC 2026 Spring: JSpecify で実現する Kotlin フレンドリーな Java API 設計
ternbusty
1
180
「エンジニアインターン、どうやって取った?」準備のリアルを語るLT会 Progate BAR
akiomatic
0
140
LLM本来の能力を解き放つサンドボックス技術とAI民主化への適用
yukukotani
3
4.3k
The NotImplementedError Problem in Ruby
koic
1
840
「なぜそう決めたのか」を残し続ける仕組み ― Notion AI カスタムエージェント × Slack連携による設計判断の自動記録 - NIKKEI Tech Talk #47
niftycorp
PRO
0
210
[2026年度第1回ORセミナー] 計画最適化ベンチャーと競技プログラミング人材
terryu16
0
270
Signal Forms: Details & Live Coding @enterJS 2026 in Mannheim
manfredsteyer
PRO
0
160
技術記事、 専門家としてのプログラマ、 言語化
mizchi
13
6.2k
Featured
See All Featured
Primal Persuasion: How to Engage the Brain for Learning That Lasts
tmiket
0
370
Efficient Content Optimization with Google Search Console & Apps Script
katarinadahlin
PRO
1
630
Winning Ecommerce Organic Search in an AI Era - #searchnstuff2025
aleyda
1
2k
Un-Boring Meetings
codingconduct
0
320
State of Search Keynote: SEO is Dead Long Live SEO
ryanjones
0
210
How to make the Groovebox
asonas
2
2.2k
Claude Code のすすめ
schroneko
67
230k
AI Search: Where Are We & What Can We Do About It?
aleyda
0
7.6k
Intergalactic Javascript Robots from Outer Space
tanoku
273
27k
How To Speak Unicorn (iThemes Webinar)
marktimemedia
1
490
Heart Work Chapter 1 - Part 1
lfama
PRO
7
36k
Ruling the World: When Life Gets Gamed
codingconduct
0
260
Transcript
It’s scary out there
Organisational Matters
None
We’re 1 year old!
Summer break (probably)
We’re looking for speakers!
It’s scary out there Distributed Systems in Elixir Poznań Elixir
Meetup #8
None
Pid 1 Pid 2
Pid 1 Pid 2 Node A Node B
The basics
iex --name
[email protected]
--cookie cookie -S mix
Node.connect(:’
[email protected]
')
(DEMO)
#PID<0.94.0>
#PID<0.94.0> node identifier (relative to current node)
#PID<0.94.0> node identifier (relative to current node) 0 =a local
process
#PID<0.94.0> Process id node identifier (relative to current node)
How does it work?
Pid 1 Node A Pid 2 Node B
Pid 1 Node A Pid 2 Node B TCP Connection
send(pid2, msg) Pid 1 Node A Pid 2 Node B
TCP Connection
send(pid2, msg) Pid 1 Node A Pid 2 Node B
destination_node = node(pid) TCP Connection
send(pid2, msg) Pid 1 Node A Pid 2 Node B
destination_node = node(pid) :erlang.term_to_binary(msg) TCP Connection
send(pid2, msg) Pid 1 Node A Pid 2 Node B
destination_node = node(pid) :erlang.term_to_binary(msg) TCP Connection
send(pid2, msg) Pid 1 Node A Pid 2 Node B
destination_node = node(pid) :erlang.term_to_binary(msg) TCP Connection :erlang.binary_to_term(encode)
send(pid2, msg) Pid 1 Node A receive msg Pid 2
Node B destination_node = node(pid) :erlang.term_to_binary(msg) TCP Connection :erlang.binary_to_term(encode)
Distributed Systems?
Distributed Systems? Solved!
Well, not exactly…
Difficulties
Node A Node B
Node A Node B Node C
Node A Node B Node C Node D
None
A lot of messages
us-east-1 us-west-2
8 fallacies of distributed computing
fallacies of distributed computing 1. The network is reliable 2.
Latency is zero 3. Bandwidth is infinite 4. The network is secure 5. Topology doesn’t change 6. The is one administrator 7. Transport cost is zero 8. The network is homogenous
CAP THEOREM
CAP THEOREM us-west-2 us-east-1
CAP THEOREM us-west-2 us-east-1 Set X=5
CAP THEOREM us-west-2 us-east-1 Set X=5 Read X
CAP THEOREM us-west-2 us-east-1 Set X=5 Set X = 7
Consistency or Availability (under network partition)
Consistency or Speed In practice
Guarantees
Pid 1 Pid 2 Pid3 Guarantees m1, m2, m3 m4,
m5, m6 send(pid2, m1) send(pid2, m2) send(pid2, m3) send(pid2, m4) send(pid2, m5) send(pid2, m6)
Pid 1 Pid 2 Pid3 Guarantees m1, m2, m3 m4,
m5, m6 send(pid2, m1) send(pid2, m2) send(pid2, m3) send(pid2, m4) send(pid2, m5) send(pid2, m6) Ordering between two processes is preserved
Pid 1 Pid 2 Pid3 Guarantees m4, m5, m6 send(pid2,
m1) send(pid2, m2) send(pid2, m3) send(pid2, m4) send(pid2, m5) send(pid2, m6) m1, m2, m3 Delivery is not guaranteed
Pid 1 Pid 2 Pid3 Guarantees m1, m2, m3 m4,
m5, m6 send(pid2, m1) send(pid2, m2) send(pid2, m3) send(pid2, m4) send(pid2, m5) send(pid2, m6) Ordering between different processes is not guaranteed
[m1, m2, m3, m4, m5, m6]
[m1, m2, m3, m4, m5, m6] [m4, m5, m6, m1,
m2, m3]
[m1, m2, m3, m4, m5, m6] [m4, m5, m6, m1,
m2, m3] [m1, m4, m2, m5, m3, m6]
[m1, m2, m3, m4, m5, m6] [m4, m5, m6, m1,
m2, m3] [m1, m4, m2, m5, m3, m6] [m1, m2, m3]
[m1, m2, m3, m4, m5, m6] [m4, m5, m6, m1,
m2, m3] [m1, m4, m2, m5, m3, m6] [m1, m2, m3] [m1, m3, m5, m6]
[m1, m2, m3, m4, m5, m6] [m4, m5, m6, m1,
m2, m3] [m1, m4, m2, m5, m3, m6] [m1, m2, m3] [m1, m3, m5, m6] []
[m1, m2, m3, m4, m5, m6] [m4, m5, m6, m1,
m2, m3] [m1, m4, m2, m5, m3, m6] [m1, m2, m3] [m1, m3, m5, m6] [] [m1, m3, m2, m4, m5, m6]
[m1, m2, m3, m4, m5, m6] [m4, m5, m6, m1,
m2, m3] [m1, m4, m2, m5, m3, m6] [m1, m2, m3] [m1, m3, m5, m6] [] [m1, m3, m2, m4, m5, m6] [M3, M3]
Phoenix Request A User Logged In
Phoenix Request A Phoenix Request B User Logged In User
Logged OUT
Phoenix Request A Phoenix Request B User Logged In User
Logged OUT This Can arrive first
Unfortunately, things tend to work fine locally
The Tools
:global
Pid 1 Node A Node B Pid 2
Pid 1 Node A Node B Pid 2 :global.register_name(“global”, self())
Pid 1 Node A Node B Pid 2 :global.register_name(“global”, self())
Register PId1 as “global”
Pid 1 Node A Node B Pid 2 :global.register_name(“global”, self())
Register PId1 as “global” Sure
Pid 1 Node A Node B Pid 2 :global.register_name(“global”, self())
Register PId1 as “global” Sure :global.whereis_name(“global”) = pid1
Pid 1 Node A Node B Pid 2 :global.register_name(“global”, self())
:global.register_name(“global”, self()) ?
(DEMO)
:global • single process registration (if everything works OK) •
Favours availability over consistency • Information stored locally (reading is fast) • Registration is blocking (may be slow)
:PG2
Pid1 Pid3 Pid2 [] [] []
Pid1 Pid3 Pid2 :pg2.create(“my_group”) [] [] []
Pid1 Pid3 Pid2 [] [] [] join join :pg2.join(“my_group”, self()
Pid1 Pid3 Pid2 [] [pid1] [] Monitor Monitor :pg2.join(“my_group”, self()
Pid1 Pid3 Pid2 [pid1] [pid1] [pid1] Monitor Monitor :pg2.join(“my_group”, self()
Pid1 Pid3 Pid2 [pid1] [pid1] [pid1]
Pid1 Pid3 Pid2 :pg2.join(“my_group”, self() [pid1] [pid1, pid2] [pid1]
Pid1 Pid3 Pid2 join :pg2.join(“my_group”, self() join [pid1, pid2] [pid1,
pid2] [pid1, pid2]
Pid1 Pid3 Pid2 [pid1] [pid2] [pid1]
Pid1 Pid3 Pid2 [pid1] [pid2] [pid1]
Pid1 Pid3 Pid2 [pid1] [pid2] [pid1]
Pid1 Pid3 Pid2 [pid1, pid2] [pid1, pid2] [pid1, pid2]
It will heal, but the state in inconsistent for some
time
What does it matter?
Node A Pg2 Pg2 Pg2 Node B Node C
Node A Pg2 Pg2 Pg2 Node B Node C Phoenix
Channels
Node A Pg2 Pg2 Pg2 Node B Node C Phoenix
Presence
Node A Pg2 Pg2 Pg2 Node B Node C Phoenix
Channels
:pg2 • Process groups • Favours availability over consistency •
Information stored locally (reading is fast) • Registration is blocking (may be slow)
Strongly consistent Solutions
Strongly consistent Solutions • Consensus - Raft, Paxos, ZAB •
Two-phase commit/THree-phase commit (2PC/3PC) • Read/Write quorums • Single database as a source of truth
Summary
Distributed Systems
Well, not exactly…
Asynchronous messages Distributed systems are all about
Really, there’s no magic
Just asynchronous messages between nodes
Just asynchronous messages between nodes & node failures
Just asynchronous messages between nodes & node failures & Communication
failures
Just asynchronous messages between nodes & node failures & Communication
failures & Network partitions
Tradeoffs Distributed systems are all about
Where to go next
Worth looking at • Riak_core • RAFT • Two-Phase Commit
(2PC) / Three-Phase Commit (3PC) • CRDTs • LASP and Partisan
Free online (click!) Elixir / Erlang
Free PDF (Click!) Distributed Systems
Theory (The hard stuff)
• https://raft.github.io/ (Raft Consensus) • http://learnyousomeerlang.com/distribunomicon • https://www.rgoarchitects.com/Files/fallacies.pdf (Fallacies of
distributed computing) • https://dzone.com/articles/better-explaining-cap-theorem (CAP Theorem) • https://medium.com/learn-elixir/message-order-and-delivery-guarantees-in-elixir- erlang-9350a3ea7541 (Elixir message delivery guarantees) • https://lasp-lang.readme.io/ (LASP) • https://arxiv.org/pdf/1802.02652.pdf (Partisan Paper) • https://bravenewgeek.com/tag/three-phase-commit/ (3PC)
We’re looking for speakers!
Thank You! Poznań Elixir Meetup #8