Composite Replicated Data Types

Modern large-scale distributed systems often rely on eventually consistent replicated stores, which achieve scalability in exchange for providing weak semantic guarantees. To compensate for this weakness, researchers have proposed various abstractions for programming on eventual consistency, such as replicated data types for resolving conflicting updates at different replicas and weak forms of transactions for maintaining relationships among objects. However, the subtle semantics of these abstractions makes using them correctly far from trivial.

[1]  Ali Ghodsi,et al.  Eventual consistency today: limitations, extensions, and beyond , 2013, CACM.

[2]  P ? ? ? ? ? ? ? % ? ? ? ? , 1991 .

[3]  Glynn Winskel,et al.  Relationships between Models of Concurency , 1993 .

[4]  Alexey Gotsman,et al.  Library abstraction for C/C++ concurrency , 2013, POPL.

[5]  Michael J. Freedman,et al.  Stronger Semantics for Low-Latency Geo-Replicated Storage , 2013, NSDI.

[6]  Glynn Winskel,et al.  Relationships Between Models of Concurrency , 1993, REX School/Symposium.

[7]  Marc Shapiro,et al.  A comprehensive study of Convergent and Commutative Replicated Data Types , 2011 .

[8]  Lars Birkedal,et al.  Unifying refinement and hoare-style reasoning in a logic for higher-order concurrency , 2013, ICFP.

[9]  C. A. R. Hoare,et al.  Proof of correctness of data representations , 1972, Acta Informatica.

[10]  Sérgio Duarte,et al.  Brief Announcement: Semantics of Eventually Consistent Replicated Sets , 2012, DISC.

[11]  Sebastian Burckhardt,et al.  Concurrent Library Correctness on the TSO Memory Model , 2012, ESOP.

[12]  Marcos K. Aguilera,et al.  Transactional storage for geo-replicated systems , 2011, SOSP.

[13]  Ali Ghodsi,et al.  Highly Available Transactions: Virtues and Limitations , 2013, Proc. VLDB Endow..

[14]  Glynn Winskel,et al.  Petri Nets, Event Structures and Domains , 1979, Semantics of Concurrent Computation.

[15]  Sebastian Burckhardt,et al.  Understanding Eventual Consistency , 2013 .

[16]  Marc Shapiro,et al.  Conflict-Free Replicated Data Types , 2011, SSS.

[17]  Cheng Li,et al.  Making geo-replicated systems fast as possible, consistent when necessary , 2012, OSDI 2012.

[18]  Michael J. Freedman,et al.  Don't settle for eventual: scalable causal consistency for wide-area storage with COPS , 2011, SOSP.

[19]  Ali Ghodsi,et al.  Eventual Consistency Today: Limitations, Extensions, and Beyond , 2013 .

[20]  Peter Sewell,et al.  Mathematizing C++ concurrency , 2011, POPL '11.

[21]  Daniel J. Abadi,et al.  Consistency Tradeoffs in Modern Distributed Database System Design: CAP is Only Part of the Story , 2012, Computer.

[22]  Sebastian Burckhardt,et al.  Eventually Consistent Transactions , 2012, ESOP.

[23]  Peter W. O'Hearn,et al.  Abstraction for concurrent objects , 2009, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[24]  Radha Jagadeesan,et al.  Quarantining Weakness - Compositional Reasoning under Relaxed Memory Models (Extended Abstract) , 2013, ESOP.

[25]  Sebastian Burckhardt,et al.  Replicated data types: specification, verification, optimality , 2014, POPL.

[26]  Nancy A. Lynch,et al.  Brewer's conjecture and the feasibility of consistent, available, partition-tolerant web services , 2002, SIGA.

[27]  Annette Bieniusa,et al.  SwiftCloud: Fault-Tolerant Geo-Replication Integrated all the Way to the Client Machine , 2013, 2014 IEEE 33rd International Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems Workshops.