A while back I blogged that set based based concerns, i.e. duplicates, that when analyzed aren't really a problem. An example of this could a be a duplicate product in a catalogue. The worst that can happen is the user sees the item twice when browsing / searching. Everything still works - the customer can still purchase it, you can still ship it. It's low risk, low impact and life goes on.
There are situations though where global uniqueness is a real requirement, for example, choosing a username during a new user registration process. The problem here is that if a duplicate occurs you may have a security issue, or maybe neither user can log in. It depends on your application of course, but this may be considered high risk.
The solution to this is to use the reservation pattern where we 'reserve' the username from some fully consistent store before creating the user. When the user is successfully created, we then confirm the reservation, via a process manager. Reservations have an expiry so if for some reason the user is not created, i.e. they abandoned the process, the username is eventually released for someone else to use. The worst thing that can happen is that a reserved/unconfirmed username is unavailable to other users for whatever duration you decide to set as an expiry.
A word of caution though - this pattern introduces a single point of failure. If the reservation system is not available, new users won't be able to sign up. Therefore this should only be considered if you absolutely need to have uniqueness (which is far less often than you think). Of course, you'll keep this component separate from your authentication and application so existing users can still log in, if it does go down :)
From a disaster recovery perspective, a username reservation system should be rebuildable from domain events.
In the end, it's all about risk analysis.comments powered by Disqus