The short summary of the article is that CAP isn’t “C, A, or P, choose
two,” but rather “When P happens, choose A or C.”
Partitions, like death and taxes, are unavoidable – think of machine
death as just a partition of that machine out into the networking
equivalent of the afterlife. So it’s up to the system designer to
decide if, when that happens, we give up availability or give up
consistency.
In HBase’s case we choose consistency, so we have to give up some availability. 这个理解CAP。太到位了
本文的简短总结是，CAP是不是“C，A，或P。选择
二，“而是”在P情况。选择A或C.“
当有P的时候。分区产生问题。要么选择不服务（保持一致性）。要么忍受不一致，服务可用.
分区存在情况下。要么选择A。要么选择C