Uncertainty Unveiled: Quantum Particles and Database Systems in a Dance of Trade-offs

Introduction

Two seemingly unrelated principles, one from quantum mechanics and the other from distributed databases, share an underlying theme of trade-offs. They offer an intriguing parallel between the microscopic world of particles and the realm of distributed database systems.

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle: Navigating the Quantum Abyss

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle asserts that certain pairs of physical properties, such as a particle's position and momentum, cannot be precisely measured simultaneously. As our knowledge of one property increases, the accuracy of the other diminishes. The more we try to pin down a particle's position, the less certain we become about its momentum, and vice versa.

The CAP Theorem: Balancing Act in the Digital Universe

Proposed by Eric Brewer, it states that in a distributed system, achieving Consistency (C), Availability (A), and Partition Tolerance (P) simultaneously is an impossible goal. Much like the delicate dance of quantum particles, the CAP theorem forces us to make trade-offs. We must prioritize between the certainty of consistent data, the availability of services, and the ability to withstand network partitions.

Proving CAP Theorem by contradiction

Let's understand the proof of this trade-off by assuming that we have a database that provides all the 3 guarantees (Consistency, Availability, Partition Tolerance). 

Let's first understand the terms - 

• Consistency - any read operation that begins after a write operation completes, must return that value, or the result of a later write operation.
• Availability - every request received by a non-failing node in the system must result in a response
• Partition Tolerance - the network will be allowed to lose arbitrarily many messages sent from one node to another

Imagine a distributed system as below that is supposedly consistent, available and partition tolerant. 

v0 is a value of a variable that is shared across two nodes G1 and G2 and the client's request is redirected to any of the nodes depending on traffic.

Client updates the value from v0->v1. The request goes to node G1. As G1 is available, it must respond. Since the network is partitioned, lets imagine this update request is not synchronised from G0 to G1.

A read of value is made by client and request goes to G2. G2 is having the old value v0. Hence, not consistent.

Thus, it is impossible to achieve C,A,P all at the same time in a database and we have to compromise on at least one of them.

Similarity in trade-off principlesHere's a table outlining the similarities between Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle and the CAP Theorem:

To schedule trial sessions and join my mentorship head to - https://www.preplaced.in/profile/nishchal-manjanbail