Advertisement

From Sequential Specifications to Eventual Consistency

  • Radha Jagadeesan
  • James Riely
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9135)

Abstract

We address a fundamental issue of interfaces that arises in the context of cloud computing. We define what it means for a replicated and distributed implementation satisfy the standard sequential specification of the data structure. Several extant implementations of replicated data structures already satisfy the constraints of our definition. We describe how the algorithms discussed in a recent survey of convergent or commutative replicated datatypes [17] satisfy our definition. We show that our definition simplifies the programmer task significantly for a class of clients who conform to the CALM principle [10].

Keywords

Cloud Computing Partial Order Mutator Event Eventual Consistency Liveness Property 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bouajjani, A., Enea, C., Hamza, J.: Verifying eventual consistency of optimistic replication systems. In POPL 2014, pp. 285–296 (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Burckhardt, S., Gotsman, A., Yang, H., Zawirski, M.: Replicated data types: specification, verification, optimality. In: POPL 2014, pp. 271–284 (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burckhardt, S., Leijen, D., Fähndrich, M., Sagiv, M.: Eventually consistent transactions. In: Seidl, H. (ed.) Programming Languages and Systems. LNCS, vol. 7211, pp. 67–86. Springer, Heidelberg (2012) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Conway, N., Marczak, W.R. et al.: Logic and lattices for distributed programming. In: ACM Symposium on Cloud Computing, pp. 1:1–1:14 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Derrick, J., Dongol, B., et al.: Quiescent consistency: defining and verifying relaxed linearizability. In: Formal, Methods, pp. 200–214 (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ellis, C.A., Gibbs, S.J.: Concurrency control in groupware systems. ACM SIGMOD Record 18(2), 399–407 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Filipovic, I., O’Hearn, P.W., Rinetzky, N., Yang, H.: Abstraction for concurrent objects. Theoretical Comp. Sci. 411, 4379–4398 (2010)zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gilbert, S., Lynch, N.: Brewer’s conjecture and the feasibility of consistent, available, partition-tolerant web services. SIGACT News, pp. 51–59 (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gotsman, A., Yang, H.: Composite replicated data types. In: Vitek, J. (ed.) ESOP 2015. LNCS, vol. 9032, pp. 585–609. Springer, Heidelberg (2015) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hellerstein, J.M.: The declarative imperative: Experiences and conjectures in distributed logic. SIGMOD Rec. 39(1), 5–19 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Herlihy, M., Wing, J.M.: Linearizability: A correctness condition for concurrent objects. ACM TOPLAS 12(3), 463–492 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jagadeesan, R., Riely, J.: Between linearizability and quiescent consistency. In: Esparza, J., Fraigniaud, P., Husfeldt, T., Koutsoupias, E. (eds.) ICALP 2014, Part II. LNCS, vol. 8573, pp. 220–231. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lamport, L.: Time, clocks, and the ordering of events in a distributed system. Commun. ACM 21(7), 558–565 (1978)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Panangaden, P., Shanbhogue, V., Stark, E.W.: Stability and sequentiality in dataflow networks. In: ICALP 1990, pp. 308–321 (1990)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Panangaden, P., Stark, E.W.: Computations, residuals, and the power of indeterminacy. In: ICALP 1988, pp. 439–454 (1988)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Saito, Y., Shapiro, M.: Optimistic replication. Comput. Surv. 37(1), 42–81 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shapiro, M., Preguiça, N., Baquero, C., Zawirski, M.: A comprehensive study of Convergent and Commutative Replicated Data Types. TR 7506, Inria (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Terry, D.B., Theimer, M.M. et al.: Managing update conflicts in bayou, a weakly connected replicated storage system. In: SOSP (1995)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vogels, W.: Eventually consistent. Communications of the ACM 52(1), 40–44 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.DePaul UniversityChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations