&gt; The only requirement is that if F is the number of unreachable nodes you wish to be able to tolerate, then your minimum cluster size is 2*F + 1.
&gt; Currently no other data store that I&#x27;m aware of offers this flexibility.<p>It isn&#x27;t true. There&#x27;re plenty of storages with same strong consistency model (tolerates F failures of 2F+1 nodes), among them are Cassandra with lightweight transactions, Riak with consistent buckets, CockroachDB and ZooKeeper.<p>&gt; However, GoshawkDB has a radically different architecture to most databases and its object-store design means that contention on objects can be dramatically reduced, allowing the performance impact of strong-serializability to be minimised.<p>Can you please describe the algorithm that you use for implementing distributed transactions?<p>&gt; just three network delays occur (and one fsync) before the outcome of the transaction is known to that node<p>3 round trips for per transaction is the result which is very similar to the Yabandeh-style transaction, see the Cockroach&#x27;s blog for details - <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cockroachlabs.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;how-cockroachdb-distributes-atomic-transactions&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cockroachlabs.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;how-cockroachdb-distribute...</a><p>Do you use the same approach?