10.1145/2911151.2911157acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageseurosysConference Proceedings
research-article

Eventually consistent register revisited

ABSTRACT

In order to converge in the presence of concurrent updates, modern eventually consistent replication systems rely on causality information and operation semantics. It is relatively easy to use semantics of high-level operations on replicated data structures, such as sets, lists, etc. However, it is difficult to exploit semantics of operations on registers, which store opaque data. In existing register designs, concurrent writes are resolved either by the application, or by arbitrating them according to their timestamps. The former is complex and may require user intervention, whereas the latter causes arbitrary updates to be lost. In this work, we identify a register construction that generalizes existing ones by combining runtime causality ordering, to identify concurrent writes, with static data semantics, to resolve them. We propose a simple conflict resolution template based on an application-predefined order on the domain of values. It eliminates or reduces the number of conflicts that need to be resolved by the user or by an explicit application logic. We illustrate some variants of our approach with use cases, and how it generalizes existing designs.

References

  1. S. Burckhardt, A. Gotsman, H. Yang, and M. Zawirski. Replicated Data Types: Specification, Verification, Optimality. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, POPL '14, pages 271--284, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM. ISBN 978-1-4503-2544-8. URL http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2535838.2535848. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. P. R. Johnson and R. H. Thomas. The maintenance of duplicate databases. Internet Request for Comments RFC 677, Information Sciences Institute, Jan. 1976. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. K. Kingsbury. The trouble with timestamps. https://aphyr.com/posts/299-the-trouble-with-timestamps, Oct. 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. D. S. Parker, G. J. Popek, G. Rudisin, A. Stoughton, B. J. Walker, E. Walton, J. M. Chow, D. Edwards, S. Kiser, and C. Kline. Detection of Mutual Inconsistency in Distributed Systems. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 9(3): 240--247, May 1983. ISSN 0098-5589. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSE.1983.236733. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. M. Shapiro, N. Preguiça, C. Baquero, and M. Zawirski. Conflict-free replicated data types. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Stabilization, Safety, and Security of Distributed Systems, SSS'11, pages 386--400, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011. Springer-Verlag. ISBN 978-3-642-24549-7. URL http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2050613.2050642. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Eventually consistent register revisited

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!