Linearizability Is Not Always a Safety Property

Guerraoui, Rachid; Ruppert, Eric

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-09581-3_5

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For deterministic objects, Lynch [13] proved that linearizability is a safety property. The proof extends easily to objects with finite non-determinism [8]. However, linearizability is not a safety property for objects with infinite non-determinism [8].…”

Section: Basic Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 95%

A paradox of eventual linearizability in shared memory

Guerraoui

Ruppert

2014

Proceedings of the 2014 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper compares, for the first time, the computational power of linearizable objects with that of eventually linearizable ones. We present the following paradox. We show that, unsurprisingly, no set of eventually linearizable objects can (1) implement any non-trivial linearizable object, nor (2) boost the consensus power of simple objects like linearizable registers. We also show, perhaps surprisingly, that any implementation of an eventually linearizable complex object like a fetch&increment counter (from linearizable base objects), can itself be viewed as a fully linearizable implementation of the same fetch&increment counter (using the exact same set of base objects).

show abstract

Section: Basic Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 95%

A paradox of eventual linearizability in shared memory

Guerraoui

Ruppert

2014

Proceedings of the 2014 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Proof. The prefix closure proof in [51][Theorem 4] assumes a definition of linearizability that is slightly different than the one we use here; that proof however also holds in our case. For completeness, we present the proof.…”

Section: Generalizing Linearizabilitymentioning

confidence: 97%

Asynchronous Wait-Free Runtime Verification and Enforcement of Linearizability

Castañeda¹,

Rodríguez²

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper studies the problem of asynchronous wait-free runtime verification of linearizability for concurrent shared memory implementations, where one seeks for an asynchronous wait-free concurrent shared memory algorithm for verifying at runtime that the current execution of a given concurrent implementation is linearizable. It proposes an interactive model for distributed runtime verification of correctness conditions, and shows that it is impossible to runtime verify linearizability for some common sequential objects such as queues, stacks, sets, priority queues, counters and the consensus problem, regardless of the consensus power of base objects. Then, the paper argues that actually a stronger version of the problem can be solved, if linearizability is indirectly verified. Namely, it shows that (1) linearizability of a class of concurrent implementations can be distributed runtime strongly verified using only read/write base objects (i.e. without the need of consensus), and (2) any implementation can be transformed to its counterpart in the class using only read/write objects too. As far as we know, this is the first distributed runtime verification algorithm for any correctness condition that is fully asynchronous and fault-tolerant. As a by-product, a simple and generic methodology for the design of self-enforced linearizable implementations is obtained. This type implementations produce outputs that are guaranteed linearizable, and are able to produce a certificate of it, which allows the design of concurrent systems in a modular manner with accountable and forensic guarantees. We are not aware of prior concurrent implementations in the literature with such properties. These results hold not only for linearizability but for a correctness condition that includes generalizations of it such as set-linearizability and interval-linearizability.

show abstract

“…from [6], but we only consider deterministic and finitely nondeterministic shared objects. Otherwise, neither linearizability, nor ec-linearizability, is a safety property.…”

Section: The Definitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brief Announcement

Kokociński

Kobus

Wojciechowski

2015

Proceedings of the 2015 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eventually consistent linearizability (ec-linearizability) is a new correctness condition for eventually consistent distributed systems (modeled as shared objects). Unlike the existing definitions of eventual consistency, ec-linearizability is suitable for describing the behaviour of some popular eventually consistent systems, such as Cassandra. It is because ec-linearizability allows for certain types of phenomena, such as lost updates. Similarly to linearizability, ec-linearizability is a safety property and is both local and nonblocking. Thus, ec-linearizability is a property that is both easy to use and reason about.

show abstract

Linearizability Is Not Always a Safety Property

Cited by 10 publications

References 13 publications

A paradox of eventual linearizability in shared memory

A paradox of eventual linearizability in shared memory

Asynchronous Wait-Free Runtime Verification and Enforcement of Linearizability

Brief Announcement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About