Formal Modeling and Analysis of Cassandra in Maude

  • Si Liu
  • Muntasir Raihan Rahman
  • Stephen Skeirik
  • Indranil Gupta
  • José Meseguer
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8829)

Abstract

Distributed key-value stores are quickly becoming a key component of cloud computing systems. In order to improve read/write latency, distributed key-value stores offer weak notions of consistency to clients by using many complex design decisions. However, it is challenging to formally analyze consistency behaviors of such systems, both because there are few formal models, and because different consistency level combinations render understanding hard, particularly under communication latency. This paper presents for the first time a formal executable model in Maude of Cassandra, a popular key-value store. We formally models Cassandra’s main components and design strategies. We formally specify various consistency properties and model check them against our model under various communication latency and consistency combinations.

Keywords

Model Check Linear Temporal Logic Strong Consistency Global Time Consistency Level 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Agha, G.: Actors: A Model of Concurrent Computation in Distributed Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge (1986)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bailis, P., Venkataraman, S., Franklin, M.J., Hellerstein, J.M., Stoica, I.: Probabilistically bounded staleness for practical partial quorums. Proc. VLDB Endow. 5(8), 776–787Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bouajjani, A., Enea, C., Hamza, J.: Verifying eventual consistency of optimistic replication systems. In: POPL, pp. 285–296 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brewer, E.A.: Towards robust distributed systems (abstract). In: PODC, p. 7 (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Clavel, M., Durán, F., Eker, S., Lincoln, P., Martí-Oliet, N., Meseguer, J., Talcott, C.: All About Maude - A High-Performance Logical Framework. LNCS, vol. 4350. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)MATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Eckhardt, J., Mühlbauer, T., AlTurki, M., Meseguer, J., Wirsing, M.: Stable availability under denial of service attacks through formal patterns. In: de Lara, J., Zisman, A. (eds.) Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering. LNCS, vol. 7212, pp. 78–93. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eckhardt, J., Mühlbauer, T., Meseguer, J., Wirsing, M.: Statistical model checking for composite actor systems. In: Martí-Oliet, N., Palomino, M. (eds.) WADT 2012. LNCS, vol. 7841, pp. 143–160. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grov, J., Ölveczky, P.C.: Formal Modeling and Analysis of Google’s Megastore in Real-Time Maude. In: Iida, S., Meseguer, J., Ogata, K. (eds.) Specification, Algebra, and Software. LNCS, vol. 8373, pp. 494–519. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hewitt, E.: Cassandra: The Definitive Guide. O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Li, C., Porto, D., Clement, A., Gehrke, J., Preguiça, N., Rodrigues, R.: Making geo-replicated systems fast as possible, consistent when necessary. In: Proc. USENIX Conference on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI), pp. 265–278 (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liu, S., Rahman, M., Skeirik, S., Gupta, I., Meseguer, J.: Formal modeling and analysis of Cassandra in Maude (2014), https://sites.google.com/site/siliunobi/icfem-cassandra
  15. 15.
    Lloyd, W., Freedman, M.J., Kaminsky, M., Andersen, D.G.: Don’t settle for eventual: Scalable causal consistency for wide-area storage with cops. In: Proc. ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP), pp. 401–416 (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Meseguer, J., Talcott, C.: Semantic models for distributed object reflection. In: Magnusson, B. (ed.) ECOOP 2002. LNCS, vol. 2374, pp. 1–36. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rahman, M.R., Golab, W., AuYoung, A., Keeton, K., Wylie, J.J.: Toward a principled framework for benchmarking consistency. In: Proc.  USENIX Workshop on Hot Topics in System Dependability, HotDep (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shapiro, M., Preguiça, N.M., Baquero, C., Zawirski, M.: Convergent and commutative replicated data types. Bulletin of the EATCS 104, 67–88 (2011)MATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Skeirik, S., Bobba, R.B., Meseguer, J.: Formal analysis of fault-tolerant group key management using ZooKeeper. In: Proc. Symposium on Cluster, Cloud, and Grid Computing (CCGRID), pp. 636–641 (2013)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vogels, W.: Amazon’s dynamo. All Things Distributed (October 2007), http://www.allthingsdistributed.com/2007/10/amazons_dynamo.html
  21. 21.
    Vogels, W.: Eventually consistent. ACM Queue 6(6), 14–19 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wirsing, M., Eckhardt, J., Mühlbauer, T., Meseguer, J.: Design and analysis of cloud-based architectures with KLAIM and maude. In: Durán, F. (ed.) WRLA 2012. LNCS, vol. 7571, pp. 54–82. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Si Liu
    • 1
  • Muntasir Raihan Rahman
    • 1
  • Stephen Skeirik
    • 1
  • Indranil Gupta
    • 1
  • José Meseguer
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations