Brief Announcement: Update Consistency in Partitionable Systems

Data replication is essential to ensure reliability, availability and fault-tolerance of massive distributed applications over large scale systems such as the Internet. However, these systems are prone to partitioning, which by Brewer's CAP theorem [1] makes it impossible to use a strong consistency criterion like atomicity. Eventual consistency [2] guaranties that all replicas eventually converge to a common state when the participants stop updating. However, it fails to fully specify shared objects and requires additional non-intuitive and error-prone distributed specification techniques, that must take into account all possible concurrent histories of updates to specify this common state [3]. This approach, that can lead to specifications as complicated as the implementations themselves, is limited by a more serious issue. The concurrent specification of objects uses the notion of concurrent events. In message-passing systems, two events are concurrent if they are enforced by different processes and each process enforced its event before it received the notification message from the other process. In other words, the notion of concurrency depends on the implementation of the object, not on its specification. Consequently, the final user may not know if two events are concurrent without explicitly tracking the messages exchanged by the processes. A specification should be independent of the system on which it is implemented. We believe that an object should be totally specified by two facets: its abstract data type, that characterizes its sequential executions, and a consistency criterion, that defines how it is supposed to behave in a distributed environment. Not only sequential specification helps repeal the problem of intention, it also allows to use the well studied and understood notions of languages and automata. This makes possible to apply all the tools developed for sequential systems, from their simple definition using structures and classes to the most advanced techniques like model checking and formal verification. Eventual consistency (EC) imposes no constraint on the convergent state, that very few depends on the sequential specification. For example, an implementation that ignores all the updates is eventually consistent, as all replicas converge to the initial state. We propose a new consistency criterion, update consistency (UC), in which the convergent state must be obtained by a total ordering of the updates, that contains the sequential order of eachComment: in DISC14 - 28th International Symposium on Distributed Computing, Oct 2014, Austin, United State

Causal Consistency: Beyond Memory

In distributed systems where strong consistency is costly when not impossible, causal consistency provides a valuable abstraction to represent program executions as partial orders. In addition to the sequential program order of each computing entity, causal order also contains the semantic links between the events that affect the shared objects -- messages emission and reception in a communication channel , reads and writes on a shared register. Usual approaches based on semantic links are very difficult to adapt to other data types such as queues or counters because they require a specific analysis of causal dependencies for each data type. This paper presents a new approach to define causal consistency for any abstract data type based on sequential specifications. It explores, formalizes and studies the differences between three variations of causal consistency and highlights them in the light of PRAM, eventual consistency and sequential consistency: weak causal consistency, that captures the notion of causality preservation when focusing on convergence ; causal convergence that mixes weak causal consistency and convergence; and causal consistency, that coincides with causal memory when applied to shared memory.Comment: 21st ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming, Mar 2016, Barcelone, Spai

Update Consistency for Wait-free Concurrent Objects

In large scale systems such as the Internet, replicating data is an essential feature in order to provide availability and fault-tolerance. Attiya and Welch proved that using strong consistency criteria such as atomicity is costly as each operation may need an execution time linear with the latency of the communication network. Weaker consistency criteria like causal consistency and PRAM consistency do not ensure convergence. The different replicas are not guaranteed to converge towards a unique state. Eventual consistency guarantees that all replicas eventually converge when the participants stop updating. However, it fails to fully specify the semantics of the operations on shared objects and requires additional non-intuitive and error-prone distributed specification techniques. This paper introduces and formalizes a new consistency criterion, called update consistency, that requires the state of a replicated object to be consistent with a linearization of all the updates. In other words, whereas atomicity imposes a linearization of all of the operations, this criterion imposes this only on updates. Consequently some read operations may return out-dated values. Update consistency is stronger than eventual consistency, so we can replace eventually consistent objects with update consistent ones in any program. Finally, we prove that update consistency is universal, in the sense that any object can be implemented under this criterion in a distributed system where any number of nodes may crash.Comment: appears in International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium, May 2015, Hyderabad, Indi

An Epistemic Perspective on Consistency of Concurrent Computations

Consistency properties of concurrent computations, e.g., sequential consistency, linearizability, or eventual consistency, are essential for devising correct concurrent algorithms. In this paper, we present a logical formalization of such consistency properties that is based on a standard logic of knowledge. Our formalization provides a declarative perspective on what is imposed by consistency requirements and provides some interesting unifying insight on differently looking properties

On Verifying Causal Consistency

Causal consistency is one of the most adopted consistency criteria for distributed implementations of data structures. It ensures that operations are executed at all sites according to their causal precedence. We address the issue of verifying automatically whether the executions of an implementation of a data structure are causally consistent. We consider two problems: (1) checking whether one single execution is causally consistent, which is relevant for developing testing and bug finding algorithms, and (2) verifying whether all the executions of an implementation are causally consistent. We show that the first problem is NP-complete. This holds even for the read-write memory abstraction, which is a building block of many modern distributed systems. Indeed, such systems often store data in key-value stores, which are instances of the read-write memory abstraction. Moreover, we prove that, surprisingly, the second problem is undecidable, and again this holds even for the read-write memory abstraction. However, we show that for the read-write memory abstraction, these negative results can be circumvented if the implementations are data independent, i.e., their behaviors do not depend on the data values that are written or read at each moment, which is a realistic assumption.Comment: extended version of POPL 201