How does PACELC relate to CAP?
PACELC extends CAP: If a partition (P) occurs, else (E) choose between latency and consistency. Under no partition, every read/write operation still trades off latency (fast local reads) against consistency (quorum reads, expensive synchronization). Systems tune this with consistency levels, read repair, quorum configurations, and caching strategies.
Answered in
The CAP Theorem Is Not a MenuNetwork partitions force a hard choice: refuse writes (CP) or accept and diverge (AP). Why the two-of-three myth is wrong, and what PACELC really tells us.
Read the full analysisOther questions this article answers
More system design questions
- Why does an index's internal data structure matter if it all ends up 'faster than a scan'?
- Why is disk I/O the thing index structures are actually optimizing for?
- Why can't a hash index handle range queries?
- What makes a bitmap index different from a B-tree, and when is it better?
- Why do B-trees stay balanced automatically as data is inserted?
- Why does a database need an index at all — why can't it just scan the table?
- When is a hash index better than a B-tree index?
- What is a composite index and why does column order matter?
Every answer on Crashtech is written by the editor of the article it comes from — never auto-summarised. Browse all answers or the System Design beat.