Then your application is unavailable, just like it would be if your session table went away? I don’t get this complaint.
The advantage is that you can use a loosely consistent datastore with expiring entries and few records at any given time. There’s lots to love about the approach.
> Then your application is unavailable, just like it would be if your session table went away?
The author replies: "congratulations, you've just reinvented sessions, with all their problems (like centralized state) and gained nothing in the process", and also with an implementation that is "less battle-tested".
My own opinion: loose consistency can work in some circumstances, but seems a security risk in others.
But we've drastically reduced the amount of central state, the complexity of managing it, the time it takes to access it, the danger of losing it, the performance impact of updates to it, while making the happy path to your site faster.
Revolutionary, maybe not, a solid improvement on the traditional design of sessions, I think so.
The advantage is that you can use a loosely consistent datastore with expiring entries and few records at any given time. There’s lots to love about the approach.