Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

A Unified, Practical, and Understandable Model of Non-transactional Consistency Levels in Distributed Replication

Published 3 Sep 2024 in cs.DC | (2409.01576v4)

Abstract: We present a practical model of non-transactional consistency levels in the context of distributed data replication. Unlike prior work, our simple Shared Object Pool (SOP) model defines common consistency levels in a unified framework centered around the single concept of ordering. This naturally reflects modern cloud object storage services and is thus easy to understand. We show that a consistency level can be intuitively defined by specifying two types of constraints on the validity of orderings allowed by the level: convergence, which bounds the lineage shape of the ordering, and relationship, which bounds the relative positions between operations. We give examples of representative protocols and systems, and discuss their availability upper bound. To further demonstrate the expressiveness and practical relevance of our model, we use it to implement a Jepsen-integrated consistency checker for the four most common levels (linearizable, sequential, causal+, and eventual); the checker analyzes consistency conformity for small-scale histories of real system runs (etcd, ZooKeeper, and RabbitMQ).

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (112)
  1. Fault-scalable Byzantine fault-tolerant services. In Proceedings of the Twentieth ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (Brighton, United Kingdom) (SOSP ’05). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 59–74. https://doi.org/10.1145/1095810.1095817
  2. S.V. Adve and K. Gharachorloo. 1996. Shared memory consistency models: a tutorial. Computer 29, 12 (1996), 66–76. https://doi.org/10.1109/2.546611
  3. The power of processor consistency. In Proceedings of the 5th Annual ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures, SPAA 1993 (Proceedings of the 5th Annual ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures, SPAA 1993). Association for Computing Machinery, Inc, 251–260. https://doi.org/10.1145/165231.165264 Funding Information: * Thk work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under grants CCR-8619S86, CCR-8909663j and CCR-9106627. Authors’ address: College of Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0280. t Tlds author was supported in part by a scholarship Hariri Foundation. Publisher Copyright: © 1993 ACM.; 5th Annual ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures, SPAA 1993 ; Conference date: 30-06-1993 Through 02-07-1993.
  4. Causal memory: definitions, implementation, and programming. Distributed Computing 9, 1 (01 Mar 1995), 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01784241
  5. WPaxos: Wide Area Network Flexible Consensus. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 31, 1 (jan 2020), 211–223. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPDS.2019.2929793
  6. Toward a Generic Fault Tolerance Technique for Partial Network Partitioning. In Proceedings of the 14th USENIX Conference on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI’20). USENIX Association, USA, Article 20, 18 pages.
  7. ChainReaction: a causal+ consistent datastore based on chain replication. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM European Conference on Computer Systems (Prague, Czech Republic) (EuroSys ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 85–98. https://doi.org/10.1145/2465351.2465361
  8. James Aspnes. 2003. Randomized protocols for asynchronous consensus. Distrib. Comput. 16, 2–3 (sep 2003), 165–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00446-002-0081-5
  9. Sharing Memory Robustly in Message-Passing Systems. J. ACM 42, 1 (jan 1995), 124–142. https://doi.org/10.1145/200836.200869
  10. Hagit Attiya and Jennifer L. Welch. 1994. Sequential Consistency versus Linearizability. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 12, 2 (may 1994), 91–122. https://doi.org/10.1145/176575.176576
  11. Highly Available Transactions: Virtues and Limitations. Proc. VLDB Endow. 7, 3 (nov 2013), 181–192. https://doi.org/10.14778/2732232.2732237
  12. Bolt-on causal consistency. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (New York, New York, USA) (SIGMOD ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 761–772. https://doi.org/10.1145/2463676.2465279
  13. Bolt-on Causal Consistency. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (New York, New York, USA) (SIGMOD ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 761–772. https://doi.org/10.1145/2463676.2465279
  14. CORFU: A distributed shared log. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 31, 4, Article 10 (dec 2013), 24 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2535930
  15. Tango: distributed data structures over a shared log. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (Farminton, Pennsylvania) (SOSP ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 325–340. https://doi.org/10.1145/2517349.2522732
  16. PRACTI replication. In Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Networked Systems Design & Implementation - Volume 3 (San Jose, CA) (NSDI’06). USENIX Association, USA, 5.
  17. Michael Ben-Or. 1983. Another advantage of free choice (Extended Abstract): Completely asynchronous agreement protocols. In Proceedings of the Second Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (Montreal, Quebec, Canada) (PODC ’83). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 27–30. https://doi.org/10.1145/800221.806707
  18. A critique of ANSI SQL isolation levels. In Proceedings of the 1995 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (San Jose, California, USA) (SIGMOD ’95). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/223784.223785
  19. Active Quorum Systems. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Hot Topics in System Dependability (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (HotDep’10). USENIX Association, USA, 1–8.
  20. Scalable State-Machine Replication. In 2014 44th Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks. 331–342. https://doi.org/10.1109/DSN.2014.41
  21. Paxos Replicated State Machines as the Basis of a High-Performance Data Store. In 8th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 11). USENIX Association, Boston, MA. https://www.usenix.org/conference/nsdi11/paxos-replicated-state-machines-basis-high-performance-data-store
  22. UniStore: A fault-tolerant marriage of causal and strong consistency. In 2021 USENIX Annual Technical Conference (USENIX ATC 21). USENIX Association, 923–937. https://www.usenix.org/conference/atc21/presentation/bravo
  23. Eric A. Brewer. 2000. Towards Robust Distributed Systems (Abstract). In Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (Portland, Oregon, USA) (PODC ’00). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 7. https://doi.org/10.1145/343477.343502
  24. From session causality to causal consistency. In 12th Euromicro Conference on Parallel, Distributed and Network-Based Processing, 2004. Proceedings. 152–158. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMPDP.2004.1271440
  25. Gryff: Unifying Consensus and Shared Registers. In Proceedings of the 17th Usenix Conference on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (Santa Clara, CA, USA) (NSDI’20). USENIX Association, USA, 591–618.
  26. Mike Burrows. 2006. The Chubby lock service for loosely-coupled distributed systems. In Proceedings of the 7th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (Seattle, Washington) (OSDI ’06). USENIX Association, USA, 335–350.
  27. Practical byzantine fault tolerance. In OSDI, Vol. 99. 173–186.
  28. PNUTS: Yahoo!’s hosted data serving platform. Proc. VLDB Endow. 1 (2008), 1277–1288.
  29. Spanner: Google’s Globally Distributed Database. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 31, 3, Article 8 (aug 2013), 22 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2491245
  30. HQ replication: a hybrid quorum protocol for byzantine fault tolerance. In Proceedings of the 7th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (Seattle, Washington) (OSDI ’06). USENIX Association, USA, 177–190.
  31. The Snowflake Elastic Data Warehouse. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Management of Data (San Francisco, California, USA) (SIGMOD ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 215–226. https://doi.org/10.1145/2882903.2903741
  32. Dynamo: amazon’s highly available key-value store. In Proceedings of Twenty-First ACM SIGOPS Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (Stevenson, Washington, USA) (SOSP ’07). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 205–220. https://doi.org/10.1145/1294261.1294281
  33. No compromises: distributed transactions with consistency, availability, and performance. In Proceedings of the 25th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (Monterey, California) (SOSP ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 54–70. https://doi.org/10.1145/2815400.2815425
  34. Amazon DynamoDB: A Scalable, Predictably Performant, and Fully Managed NoSQL Database Service. In 2022 USENIX Annual Technical Conference (USENIX ATC 22). USENIX Association, Carlsbad, CA, 1037–1048. https://www.usenix.org/conference/atc22/presentation/elhemali
  35. State-machine replication for planet-scale systems. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth European Conference on Computer Systems (Heraklion, Greece) (EuroSys ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 24, 15 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3342195.3387543
  36. etcd. 2023. etcd: A distributed, reliable key-value store for the most critical data of a distributed system. https://etcd.io/, Last accessed on 2023-11-13.
  37. Antipode: Enforcing Cross-Service Causal Consistency in Distributed Applications. In Proceedings of the 29th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (Koblenz, Germany) (SOSP ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 298–313. https://doi.org/10.1145/3600006.3613176
  38. Impossibility of Distributed Consensus with One Faulty Process. J. ACM 32, 2 (apr 1985), 374–382. https://doi.org/10.1145/3149.214121
  39. High Throughput Replication with Integrated Membership Management. In 2022 USENIX Annual Technical Conference (USENIX ATC 22). USENIX Association, Carlsbad, CA, 575–592. https://www.usenix.org/conference/atc22/presentation/fouto
  40. Strong and Efficient Consistency with Consistency-Aware Durability. In 18th USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies (FAST 20). USENIX Association, Santa Clara, CA, 323–337. https://www.usenix.org/conference/fast20/presentation/ganesan
  41. Exploiting Nil-Externality for Fast Replicated Storage. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGOPS 28th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (Virtual Event, Germany) (SOSP ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 440–456. https://doi.org/10.1145/3477132.3483543
  42. The Google File System. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles. Bolton Landing, NY, 20–43.
  43. David Kenneth Gifford. 1981. Information Storage in a Decentralized Computer System. Ph. D. Dissertation. Stanford, CA, USA. AAI8124072.
  44. Seth Gilbert and Nancy Lynch. 2002. Brewer’s Conjecture and the Feasibility of Consistent, Available, Partition-Tolerant Web Services. SIGACT News 33, 2 (jun 2002), 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1145/564585.564601
  45. Replicated Data Types: Specification, Verification, Optimality. In 41st Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL) (41st symposium on principles of programming languages (popl) ed.). ACM SIGPLAN. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/replicated-data-types-specification-verification-optimality/
  46. Consistent Distributed Storage. Morgan & Claypool Publishers. https://books.google.com/books?id=bWiKzgEACAAJ
  47. Jim Gray. 1985. Why Do Computers Stop and What Can Be Done About It? HP. Retrieved 2023-01-05 from https://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/tandem/TR-85.7.pdf
  48. Jim Gray. 1988. The Transaction Concept: Virtues and Limitations. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA, 140–150.
  49. uKharon: A Membership Service for Microsecond Applications. In 2022 USENIX Annual Technical Conference (USENIX ATC 22). USENIX Association, Carlsbad, CA, 101–120. https://www.usenix.org/conference/atc22/presentation/guerraoui
  50. Cornus: Atomic Commit for a Cloud DBMS with Storage Disaggregation. Proc. VLDB Endow. 16, 2 (nov 2022), 379–392. https://doi.org/10.14778/3565816.3565837
  51. Theo Haerder and Andreas Reuter. 1983. Principles of Transaction-Oriented Database Recovery. ACM Comput. Surv. 15, 4 (dec 1983), 287–317. https://doi.org/10.1145/289.291
  52. Regular Sequential Serializability and Regular Sequential Consistency. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGOPS 28th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (Virtual Event, Germany) (SOSP ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 163–179. https://doi.org/10.1145/3477132.3483566
  53. M. Herlihy and N. Shavit. 2011. The Art of Multiprocessor Programming. Elsevier Science. https://books.google.com/books?id=pFSwuqtJgxYC
  54. Maurice P. Herlihy and Jeannette M. Wing. 1990. Linearizability: A Correctness Condition for Concurrent Objects. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 12, 3 (jul 1990), 463–492. https://doi.org/10.1145/78969.78972
  55. M.D. Hill. 1998. Multiprocessors should support simple memory consistency models. Computer 31, 8 (1998), 28–34. https://doi.org/10.1109/2.707614
  56. Flexible Paxos: Quorum intersection revisited. arXiv:1608.06696 [cs.DC] https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.06696
  57. TiDB: A Raft-Based HTAP Database. Proc. VLDB Endow. 13, 12 (aug 2020), 3072–3084. https://doi.org/10.14778/3415478.3415535
  58. ZooKeeper: wait-free coordination for internet-scale systems. In Proceedings of the 2010 USENIX Conference on USENIX Annual Technical Conference (Boston, MA) (USENIXATC’10). USENIX Association, USA, 11.
  59. JEPSEN. 2016. Jepsen Consistency Models. JEPSEN. Retrieved 2023-01-05 from https://jepsen.io/consistency
  60. Tunable Causal Consistency: Specification and Implementation. arXiv:2211.03501 [cs.DC] https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.03501
  61. An Evaluation of Alternative Architectures for Transaction Processing in the Cloud. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (Indianapolis, Indiana, USA) (SIGMOD ’10). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 579–590. https://doi.org/10.1145/1807167.1807231
  62. Providing high availability using lazy replication. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 10, 4 (nov 1992), 360–391. https://doi.org/10.1145/138873.138877
  63. Avinash Lakshman and Prashant Malik. 2010. Cassandra: a decentralized structured storage system. SIGOPS Oper. Syst. Rev. 44, 2 (apr 2010), 35–40. https://doi.org/10.1145/1773912.1773922
  64. Lamport. 1979. How to Make a Multiprocessor Computer That Correctly Executes Multiprocess Programs. IEEE Trans. Comput. C-28, 9 (1979), 690–691. https://doi.org/10.1109/TC.1979.1675439
  65. Leslie Lamport. 1978a. The Implementation of Reliable Distributed Multiprocess Systems. Computer Networks 2 (August 1978), 95–114. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/implementation-reliable-distributed-multiprocess-systems/
  66. Leslie Lamport. 1978b. Time, Clocks, and the Ordering of Events in a Distributed System. Commun. ACM 21, 7 (jul 1978), 558–565. https://doi.org/10.1145/359545.359563
  67. Leslie Lamport. 1998. The Part-Time Parliament. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems 16, 2 (May 1998), 133-169. Also appeared as SRC Research Report 49. This paper was first submitted in 1990, setting a personal record for publication delay that has since been broken by [60]. (May 1998). https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/part-time-parliament/ ACM SIGOPS Hall of Fame Award in 2012.
  68. Leslie Lamport. 2001. Paxos Made Simple. ACM SIGACT News (Distributed Computing Column) 32, 4 (Whole Number 121, December 2001) (December 2001), 51–58. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/paxos-made-simple/
  69. Leslie Lamport. 2006. Fast Paxos. Distrib. Comput. 19, 2 (oct 2006), 79–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00446-006-0005-x
  70. Vertical paxos and primary-backup replication. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (Calgary, AB, Canada) (PODC ’09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 312–313. https://doi.org/10.1145/1582716.1582783
  71. L. Lamport and M. Massa. 2004. Cheap Paxos. In International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, 2004. 307–314. https://doi.org/10.1109/DSN.2004.1311900
  72. Implementing linearizability at large scale and low latency. In Proceedings of the 25th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (Monterey, California) (SOSP ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1145/2815400.2815416
  73. Just Say NO to Paxos Overhead: Replacing Consensus with Network Ordering. In 12th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI 16). USENIX Association, Savannah, GA, 467–483. https://www.usenix.org/conference/osdi16/technical-sessions/presentation/li
  74. Richard J. Lipton and Jonathan Sandberg. 1988. PRAM: A Scalable Shared Memory. (08 1988).
  75. Don’t Settle for Eventual: Scalable Causal Consistency for Wide-Area Storage with COPS. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (Cascais, Portugal) (SOSP ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 401–416. https://doi.org/10.1145/2043556.2043593
  76. Consistency, Availability, and Convergence. (05 2012).
  77. Depot: Cloud Storage with Minimal Trust. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 29, 4, Article 12 (dec 2011), 38 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2063509.2063512
  78. Jenny Mankin. 2007. Memory Consistency Models: A Survey in Past and Present Research. (2007).
  79. Mencius: building efficient replicated state machines for WANs. In Proceedings of the 8th USENIX Conference on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (San Diego, California) (OSDI’08). USENIX Association, USA, 369–384.
  80. I Can’t Believe It’s Not Causal! Scalable Causal Consistency with No Slowdown Cascades. In 14th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 17). USENIX Association, Boston, MA, 453–468. https://www.usenix.org/conference/nsdi17/technical-sessions/presentation/mehdi
  81. Microsoft. 2022. Consistency levels in Azure Cosmos DB. Microsoft. Retrieved 2023-01-06 from https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cosmos-db/consistency-levels
  82. Transaction Management in the R* Distributed Database Management System. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 11, 4 (dec 1986), 378–396. https://doi.org/10.1145/7239.7266
  83. There is more consensus in Egalitarian parliaments. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (Farminton, Pennsylvania) (SOSP ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 358–372. https://doi.org/10.1145/2517349.2517350
  84. David Mosberger. 1993. Memory Consistency Models. SIGOPS Oper. Syst. Rev. 27, 1 (jan 1993), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/160551.160553
  85. When paxos meets erasure code: reduce network and storage cost in state machine replication. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Symposium on High-Performance Parallel and Distributed Computing (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (HPDC ’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 61–72. https://doi.org/10.1145/2600212.2600218
  86. Tolerating Slowdowns in Replicated State Machines using Copilots. In 14th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI 20). USENIX Association, 583–598. https://www.usenix.org/conference/osdi20/presentation/ngo
  87. Brian M. Oki and Barbara H. Liskov. 1988. Viewstamped Replication: A New Primary Copy Method to Support Highly-Available Distributed Systems. In Proceedings of the Seventh Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) (PODC ’88). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 8–17. https://doi.org/10.1145/62546.62549
  88. Diego Ongaro and John Ousterhout. 2014. In Search of an Understandable Consensus Algorithm. In Proceedings of the 2014 USENIX Conference on USENIX Annual Technical Conference (Philadelphia, PA) (USENIX ATC’14). USENIX Association, USA, 305–320.
  89. Rabia: Simplifying State-Machine Replication Through Randomization. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGOPS 28th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (Virtual Event, Germany) (SOSP ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 472–487. https://doi.org/10.1145/3477132.3483582
  90. Flexible update propagation for weakly consistent replication. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (Saint Malo, France) (SOSP ’97). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 288–301. https://doi.org/10.1145/268998.266711
  91. AllConcur: Leaderless Concurrent Atomic Broadcast. In Proceedings of the 26th International Symposium on High-Performance Parallel and Distributed Computing (Washington, DC, USA) (HPDC ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 205–218. https://doi.org/10.1145/3078597.3078598
  92. Designing Distributed Systems Using Approximate Synchrony in Data Center Networks. In Proceedings of the 12th USENIX Conference on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (Oakland, CA) (NSDI’15). USENIX Association, USA, 43–57.
  93. Robbert Van Renesse and Fred B. Schneider. 2004. Chain Replication for Supporting High Throughput and Availability. In 6th Symposium on Operating Systems Design & Implementation (OSDI 04). USENIX Association, San Francisco, CA. https://www.usenix.org/conference/osdi-04/chain-replication-supporting-high-throughput-and-availability
  94. Fred B. Schneider. 1990. Implementing Fault-Tolerant Services Using the State Machine Approach: A Tutorial. ACM Comput. Surv. 22, 4 (dec 1990), 299–319. https://doi.org/10.1145/98163.98167
  95. Experience with Grapevine: the growth of a distributed system. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 2, 1 (feb 1984), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1145/2080.2081
  96. ScyllaDB. 2023. Beyond Legacy NoSQL: 7 Design Principles Behind ScyllaDB. https://lp.scylladb.com/real-time-big-data-database-principles-thanks.html, Last accessed on 2023-11-13.
  97. A Primer on Memory Consistency and Cache Coherence (1st ed.). Morgan & Claypool Publishers.
  98. State machine replication scalability made simple. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth European Conference on Computer Systems (Rennes, France) (EuroSys ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 17–33. https://doi.org/10.1145/3492321.3519579
  99. FLAIR: Accelerating Reads with Consistency-Aware Network Routing. In 17th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 20). USENIX Association, Santa Clara, CA, 723–737. https://www.usenix.org/conference/nsdi20/presentation/takruri
  100. Session Guarantees for Weakly Consistent Replicated Data. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on on Parallel and Distributed Information Systems (Autin, Texas, USA) (PDIS ’94). IEEE Computer Society Press, Washington, DC, USA, 140–150.
  101. Enabling the Next Generation of Multi-Region Applications with CockroachDB. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Management of Data (Philadelphia, PA, USA) (SIGMOD ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2312–2325. https://doi.org/10.1145/3514221.3526053
  102. Amazon Aurora: Design Considerations for High Throughput Cloud-Native Relational Databases. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Conference on Management of Data (Chicago, Illinois, USA) (SIGMOD ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1041–1052. https://doi.org/10.1145/3035918.3056101
  103. Paolo Viotti and Marko Vukolić. 2016. Consistency in Non-Transactional Distributed Storage Systems. ACM Comput. Surv. 49, 1, Article 19 (jun 2016), 34 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2926965
  104. Werner Vogels. 2008. Eventually Consistent: Building Reliable Distributed Systems at a Worldwide Scale Demands Trade-Offs Between Consistency and Availability. Queue 6, 6 (oct 2008), 14–19. https://doi.org/10.1145/1466443.1466448
  105. CRaft: An Erasure-coding-supported Version of Raft for Reducing Storage Cost and Network Cost. In 18th USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies (FAST 20). USENIX Association, Santa Clara, CA, 297–308. https://www.usenix.org/conference/fast20/presentation/wang-zizhong
  106. Scaling replicated state machines with compartmentalization. Proc. VLDB Endow. 14, 11 (jul 2021), 2203–2215. https://doi.org/10.14778/3476249.3476273
  107. HotStuff: BFT Consensus with Linearity and Responsiveness. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (Toronto ON, Canada) (PODC ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 347–356. https://doi.org/10.1145/3293611.3331591
  108. Haifeng Yu. 2000. Design and Evaluation of a Continuous Consistency Model for Replicated Services. In Fourth Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI 2000). USENIX Association, San Diego, CA. https://www.usenix.org/conference/osdi-2000/design-and-evaluation-continuous-consistency-model-replicated-services
  109. Haifeng Yu and Amin Vahdat. 2002. Design and Evaluation of a Conit-Based Continuous Consistency Model for Replicated Services. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 20, 3 (aug 2002), 239–282. https://doi.org/10.1145/566340.566342
  110. TicToc: Time Traveling Optimistic Concurrency Control. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Management of Data (San Francisco, California, USA) (SIGMOD ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1629–1642. https://doi.org/10.1145/2882903.2882935
  111. Building consistent transactions with inconsistent replication. In Proceedings of the 25th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (Monterey, California) (SOSP ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 263–278. https://doi.org/10.1145/2815400.2815404
  112. FoundationDB: A Distributed Unbundled Transactional Key Value Store. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Management of Data (Virtual Event, China) (SIGMOD ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2653–2666. https://doi.org/10.1145/3448016.3457559

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Sign Up to Summarize

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Sign Up to Generate All Videos Subscribe on YouTube

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Sign Up to Generate

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Generate Now

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Generate Now

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Sign Up

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 1 tweet with 0 likes about this paper.

Sign Up for Free