[kgeist]

We once had a bug from this incorrect use of "distributed locks". A server we accessed under a lock suddenly started lagging past the timeout of the lock, another server using the lock assumed the lock was released (i.e. timed out) and acquired it, while the original server assumed it still owned the lock. Data corruption occurred.

This implementation has "heartbeats" so I wonder whether it solves the problem.

[Gwypaas]

Heartbeats does not solve it. You need fencing tokens to reject writes if the lock has expired.

See this amazing article by Martin Kleppman, author of Designing Data-Intensive Applications.

"How to do distributed locking"

https://martin.kleppmann.com/2016/02/08/how-to-do-distribute...