persistence-options.md

Persistence options - Eventflow

Option A - Sidecar by Pod

Pros

• Simplicity when unfolding along with each replica.
• Minimum latency when operating locally.

cons

• Duplicate resources and status in each pod.
• Complex synchronization between replicas.

When I would apply

• Low -scale deployments or development environments.

Option B - Centralized Service

Pros

• Strong consistency and concurrence control.
• Eventflow independent scale.

cons

• Add a network latency.
• Requires high availability.

When I would apply

• When multiple replicas are needed with immediate shared.

Option C - Object Storage

Pros

• Scalability practically unlimited.
• Reduced operating cost.

cons

• Eventual consistency.
• Superior latency for reading/writing operations.

Target State

• Long -term destination for mass loads and durability.

Comparison

Criteria	Option A - Sidecar	Option B - Centralized Service	Option C - Object Storage
Complexity	Baja	Average	Average
Latency	Minimal	Moderate	High
Consistency	Local, not shared	Strong	Eventual
Scalability	Linked to Pods	Independent	Unlimited
Operation	POD management	Unique Service	Managed Service

Decision

The ** option B - centralized service ** is adopted as an immediate solution because it offers strong consistency and allows you to climb without duplicating the State as in option A.