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
Sponsored
·
SiteGround - Reliable hosting with speed, security, and support you can count on.
→
Maciej Kaszubowski
July 07, 2018
Programming
200
0
Share
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
450
Modular Design in Elixir (ElixirConf EU 2019)
mkaszubowski
2
920
The Big Ball of Nouns
mkaszubowski
0
140
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
530
CRDTs - The science behind Phoenix Presence
mkaszubowski
2
310
Other Decks in Programming
See All in Programming
Claspは野良GASの夢をみるか
takter00
0
140
AI時代のUIはどこへ行く?その2!
yusukebe
15
4.6k
Copilot CLI の継戦能力を高める コンテキスト管理
nozomutu
1
1.1k
oxlintはeslint/typescript-eslintを置き換えられるのか
shomafujita
2
290
関係性から理解する"同一性"の型用語たち
pvcresin
2
620
ECR拡張スキャンでSBOMを収集して サプライチェーン攻撃の影響調査を 爆速で終わらせてみた
akihisaikeda
2
210
Oxlintはいかにしてtsgolintのlint ruleを呼び出しているのか
syumai
2
1k
Technical Debt: Understanding it Rightly, Engaging it Rightly #LaravelLiveJP
shogogg
0
180
[KCD Czech] eBPF Meets the GPU: Future of AI Infra Observability
doniacld
0
130
RailsTokyo 2026#4: AI様があれば、 Hotwireの弱点は消えるか?
naofumi
5
1k
Agentic UI beyond Chats Architecture Patterns & Open Standards @ngMunich 05/2026
manfredsteyer
PRO
0
190
Swiftのレキシカルスコープ管理
kntkymt
0
200
Featured
See All Featured
B2B Lead Gen: Tactics, Traps & Triumph
marketingsoph
0
130
DevOps and Value Stream Thinking: Enabling flow, efficiency and business value
helenjbeal
1
210
Ethics towards AI in product and experience design
skipperchong
2
290
Getting science done with accelerated Python computing platforms
jacobtomlinson
2
210
Organizational Design Perspectives: An Ontology of Organizational Design Elements
kimpetersen
PRO
1
710
Digital Projects Gone Horribly Wrong (And the UX Pros Who Still Save the Day) - Dean Schuster
uxyall
0
1.5k
Making the Leap to Tech Lead
cromwellryan
135
9.9k
AI: The stuff that nobody shows you
jnunemaker
PRO
7
670
Mozcon NYC 2025: Stop Losing SEO Traffic
samtorres
1
240
16th Malabo Montpellier Forum Presentation
akademiya2063
PRO
0
130
Mind Mapping
helmedeiros
PRO
1
220
RailsConf 2023
tenderlove
30
1.5k
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