Skip to content
Rival
Models
CompareBest ForArena
Sign Up
Sign Up

Compare AI vibes, not scores. Side-by-side outputs across the world's best models.

@rival_tips

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Leaderboard
  • Challenges

Discover

  • AI Creators
  • AI Tools
  • The Graveyard

Developers

  • Developer Hub
  • MCP Server
  • .llmignore
  • Badges
  • RIVAL Datasets

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Sponsor
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
© 2026 Rival
Rival
Models
CompareBest ForArena
Sign Up
Sign Up

Compare AI vibes, not scores. Side-by-side outputs across the world's best models.

@rival_tips

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Leaderboard
  • Challenges

Discover

  • AI Creators
  • AI Tools
  • The Graveyard

Developers

  • Developer Hub
  • MCP Server
  • .llmignore
  • Badges
  • RIVAL Datasets

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Sponsor
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
© 2026 Rival
  1. Home
  2. Models
  3. Z.AI: GLM 4.5 Air
  4. Debug This Architecture

See how Z.AI: GLM 4.5 Air compares on this challenge:

  • Z.AI: GLM 4.5 Air vs Claude Sonnet 4.6
  • Z.AI: GLM 4.5 Air vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
  • Z.AI: GLM 4.5 Air vs Z.ai: GLM 5

4 models have responded to the "Debug This Architecture" challenge. Compare their approaches side-by-side on RIVAL. This response is part of RIVAL's open dataset of 5,600+ AI model responses.

Rival
Models
CompareBest ForArena
Sign Up
Sign Up
Back to Z.AI: GLM 4.5 Air

Debug This Architecture

Glm 4 5 Air's response to the 'Debug This Architecture' challenge.

Z.AI: GLM 4.5 Air
February 3, 2026
Text

?
Prompt

Here's the architecture for a real-time collaborative document editor (like Google Docs): **System Overview:** - Frontend: React SPA with WebSocket connections - Backend: Node.js API servers behind a load balancer (round-robin) - Database: PostgreSQL for document storage, Redis for session cache - Real-time: Each API server maintains its own WebSocket connections to clients - Sync Strategy: Last-write-wins with timestamps from client clocks - Storage: Documents saved as full HTML snapshots every 30 seconds - Auth: JWT tokens with 24-hour expiry, stored in localStorage - CDN: CloudFront for static assets, also caches API responses for 5 minutes **Data Flow:** 1. User types → change event sent via WebSocket to their connected server 2. Server writes change to PostgreSQL 3. Server broadcasts change to all WebSocket clients connected to THAT server 4. Other servers poll PostgreSQL every 2 seconds for changes 5. Conflict resolution: if two users edit the same paragraph, last timestamp wins **Scaling Plan:** - Horizontal scaling by adding more API servers - Database read replicas for read-heavy operations - Document partitioning by organization ID Identify all potential failure modes, race conditions, and scaling bottlenecks in this architecture. For each issue found, propose a specific solution with trade-offs.

Z.AI: GLM 4.5 Air
Response

glm-4.5-air logo
Z.AI: GLM 4.5 AirDebug This Architecture
glm-4.5-air logo
Z.AI: GLM 4.5 Air

Failure Modes, Race Conditions, and Scaling Bottlenecks Analysis

1. WebSocket Connection Management

Issue: WebSocket connections are server-specific, causing connection loss during server failover or scaling events.

Solution: Implement a connection pool with automatic reconnection logic in the client. Use a consistent hashing load balancer that preserves affinity during scaling.

Trade-offs:

  • Pro: Seamless user experience during minor server events
  • Con: Increased client complexity, potential for duplicate connections during rapid scale events

2. Last-Write-Wins Conflict Resolution

Issue: Client clocks can be out of sync, leading to incorrect conflict resolution where earlier edits overwrite newer ones.

Solution: Implement vector clocks or version vectors instead of simple timestamps. Track edit history and allow manual conflict resolution when detected.

Trade-offs:

  • Pro: More accurate conflict resolution, preserves edit history
  • Con: Increased complexity in storage and comparison logic, slightly higher network overhead

3. Polling-Based Sync Between Servers

Issue: 2-second polling creates unnecessary database load and potential for stale data between servers.

Solution: Replace polling with a publish-subscribe system (like Redis Pub/Sub) for real-time change propagation between servers.

Trade-offs:

  • Pro: Near real-time sync between servers, reduced database load
  • Con: Adds dependency on Redis Pub/Sub, potential for message loss if Redis fails

4. Document Partitioning

Issue: Partitioning by organization ID may lead to hot partitions for large organizations.

Solution: Implement sharding at the document level rather than organization level, with a consistent hashing ring for distribution.

Trade-offs:

  • Pro: Better load distribution, prevents hot partitions
  • Con: More complex sharding logic, potential for cross-shard queries

5. JWT Token Expiry

Issue: 24-hour expiry and localStorage storage creates poor UX for long sessions and security risks if device is compromised.

Solution: Implement refresh tokens with shorter-lived JWTs. Store refresh tokens in HttpOnly cookies with secure flags.

Trade-offs:

  • Pro: Better security, smoother session renewal
  • Con: Increased server load for token validation, more complex token management

6. HTML Snapshot Storage

Issue: Storing full HTML snapshots every 30 seconds is inefficient and creates storage bloat.

Solution: Implement operational transformation or differential synchronization to store only changes between versions.

Trade-offs:

  • Pro: Reduced storage needs, faster sync times
  • Con: Increased complexity in the sync algorithm, potential for sync drift over time

7. CDN Caching API Responses

Issue: Caching API responses for 5 minutes conflicts with real-time document updates.

Solution: Don't cache document-related API responses. Only cache static assets and user-specific responses with appropriate cache headers.

Trade-offs:

  • Pro: Ensures real-time updates are always current
  • Con: Reduced CDN benefits for dynamic content, potentially higher origin server load

8. Database Write Contention

Issue: Multiple servers writing to the same document rows creates lock contention.

Solution: Implement optimistic locking with version numbers or implement a write coordinator pattern for document updates.

Trade-offs:

  • Pro: Reduces database contention, better concurrency
  • Con: Increased complexity in update logic, potential for more retries

9. Session Cache in Redis

Issue: Single point of failure for session data if Redis goes down.

Solution: Implement Redis clustering with replication, and add a fallback to database lookup for sessions if Redis is unavailable.

Trade-offs:

  • Pro: High availability for session data
  • Con: Increased complexity, potential for temporary performance degradation during failover

10. Load Balancer Affinity

Issue: Round-robin load balancing breaks WebSocket affinity when servers are added/removed.

Solution: Use a consistent hashing load balancer that maintains session affinity even as the server pool changes.

Trade-offs:

  • Pro: Maintains WebSocket connections during scaling events
  • Con: Less even distribution of connections during scaling, potential for some servers to be overloaded

11. Clock Skew Between Clients

Issue: Client clocks can be significantly out of sync, affecting conflict resolution.

Solution: Implement server-side timestamping for all operations, and adjust client clocks using NTP synchronization.

Trade-offs:

  • Pro: More accurate conflict resolution, consistent view of edit history
  • Con: Increased server load for timestamping, potential for slight delays in user feedback

12. Document Version History

Issue: No mechanism to revert to previous versions or track edit history.

Solution: Implement a version control system for documents with regular snapshots and delta storage.

Trade-offs:

  • Pro: Better audit trail, ability to revert changes
  • Con: Increased storage needs, more complex document management

13. Network Partitions

Issue: Network partitions can cause some servers to be isolated, leading to inconsistent state.

Solution: Implement a quorum-based system for document updates and use consensus protocols for critical operations.

Trade-offs:

  • Pro: Better consistency during network issues
  • Con: Increased latency for updates, more complex failure detection

14. Memory Usage for WebSocket Connections

Issue: Each server maintains its own WebSocket connections, which can consume significant memory at scale.

Solution: Implement a dedicated WebSocket service that can scale independently, using a message broker to route updates.

Trade-offs:

  • Pro: Better resource utilization, dedicated scaling for real-time features
  • Con: Increased system complexity, additional service to manage

15. Initial Document Load

Issue: Loading full document history on initial connect can be slow for large documents.

Solution: Implement incremental loading with virtual scrolling, loading only visible portions initially.

Trade-offs:

  • Pro: Faster initial load time, better perceived performance
  • Con: More complex client rendering logic, potential for layout shifts

These solutions address the major failure modes, race conditions, and scaling bottlenecks while considering the trade-offs between complexity, performance, and reliability. The specific implementation would depend on the exact requirements and constraints of the system.

Debug This Architecture

Turn this model response into notes, narration, or a short video

Auto NotesTranscriptNarrateVideo Cut

Partner link

This output is part of our open dataset — 5K+ AI responses across 200 models

About Z.AI: GLM 4.5 Air

Capabilities

ConversationReasoningAnalysis

Categories

Text

Specifications

Provider
Zhipu
Released
2025-07-25
Size
LARGE
Context
128,000 tokens

Keep exploring

SAME PROMPT

Claude Sonnet 4.6's version

Same prompt, different result

COMPARE

Z.AI: GLM 4.5 Air vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview

Both outputs, side by side

Compare AI vibes, not scores. Side-by-side outputs across the world's best models.

@rival_tips

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Leaderboard
  • Challenges

Discover

  • AI Creators
  • AI Tools
  • The Graveyard

Developers

  • Developer Hub
  • MCP Server
  • .llmignore
  • Badges
  • RIVAL Datasets

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Sponsor
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
© 2026 Rival