Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The article was comparing OPA/Cedar to Zanzibar, which is why my head went there. I did go looking for info on how OPAL deals with caching and consistency and found these:

- Authz data is kept in memory, so what you can authorize over is limited by the memory of the box you run OPAL/OPA. The docs also mention sharding, but I'm not clear on how you actually do that with OPA. [0] Maybe there's another doc that I missed.

- You can get a token representing the last time data was synced to the cache in an OPAL health check, but I'm not clear on how you'd use it to ensure consistency in your application since hydrating the cache is asynchronous. [1]

Anyway, those are the types of things Zanzibar is concerned with, so that comparison (instead of Cedar) would've made more sense to me. Without spending more time on it, I'm not sure if I've represented OPAL correctly above, that's just what I found when I went looking.

[0]: https://docs.opal.ac/faq/#handling-a-lot-of-data-in-opa

[1]: https://docs.opal.ac/faq/#how-does-opal-guarantee-that-the-p...



> I'm not clear on how you actually do that with OPA The sharding is managed from the OPAL control plane, when you configure the data sources you also configure the way the sharding works.

> ensure consistency in your application since hydrating the cache is asynchronous. OPAL use eventual consistency for cache reliability, you can know that data has changed, even before you know what changed.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: