Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Note that consistency as defined in the CAP theorem is quite different from the consistency guaranteed in ACID database transactions. [4] Availability Every request received by a non-failing node in the system must result in a response. This is the definition of availability in CAP theorem as defined by Gilbert and Lynch. [1]
The second is a link to the article that details that symbol, using its Unicode standard name or common alias. (Holding the mouse pointer on the hyperlink will pop up a summary of the symbol's function.); The third gives symbols listed elsewhere in the table that are similar to it in meaning or appearance, or that may be confused with it;
The following table lists many common symbols, together with their name, how they should be read out loud, and the related field of mathematics. Additionally, the subsequent columns contains an informal explanation, a short example, the Unicode location, the name for use in HTML documents, [1] and the LaTeX symbol.
The tradeoff between availability, consistency and latency, as described by the PACELC theorem. In database theory, the PACELC theorem is an extension to the CAP theorem.It states that in case of network partitioning (P) in a distributed computer system, one has to choose between availability (A) and consistency (C) (as per the CAP theorem), but else (E), even when the system is running ...
C-theorem ; CAP theorem (theoretical computer science) CPCTC (triangle geometry) Cameron–Erdős theorem (discrete mathematics) Cameron–Martin theorem (measure theory) Cantor–Bernstein–Schröder theorem (set theory, cardinal numbers) Cantor's intersection theorem (real analysis) Cantor's isomorphism theorem (order theory)
So the status of CAP as a theorem is something of an urban myth, but read on. The definition of consistency in distributed systems does not usually include the end user, which itself seems inconsistent. Thus a database can be defined as consistent and users can still end up with different answers beyond the system boundary.
The theorem is a syntactic consequence of all the well-formed formulas preceding it in the proof. For a well-formed formula to qualify as part of a proof, it must be the result of applying a rule of the deductive apparatus (of some formal system) to the previous well-formed formulas in the proof sequence.
In mathematical logic, a conservative extension is a supertheory of a theory which is often convenient for proving theorems, but proves no new theorems about the language of the original theory. Similarly, a non-conservative extension is a supertheory which is not conservative, and can prove more theorems than the original.