Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Management of Data 2016
DOI: 10.1145/2882903.2882951
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

TARDiS

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our idea of versioning state bears resemblance to Concurrent Revisions [Burckhardt et al 2010[Burckhardt et al , 2012, a programming abstraction that provides deterministic concurrent execution, and Tardis [Crooks et al 2016], a key-value store that also supports a branch-and-merge concurrency control abstraction. However, unlike these previous efforts which provide no principled methodology for constructing merge functions, or reasoning about their correctness, our primary contribution is in the development of a type-based compositional derivation strategy for merge operations over sophisticated inductive data types.…”
Section: Related Work and Conclusionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our idea of versioning state bears resemblance to Concurrent Revisions [Burckhardt et al 2010[Burckhardt et al , 2012, a programming abstraction that provides deterministic concurrent execution, and Tardis [Crooks et al 2016], a key-value store that also supports a branch-and-merge concurrency control abstraction. However, unlike these previous efforts which provide no principled methodology for constructing merge functions, or reasoning about their correctness, our primary contribution is in the development of a type-based compositional derivation strategy for merge operations over sophisticated inductive data types.…”
Section: Related Work and Conclusionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In some distributed models, however, state changes received are stored, and conflict resolution, if any, is deferred to a later time. For example, total store ordering [Inc and Weaver 1994], global sequence protocols [Burckhardt et al 2015;Gotsman and Burckhardt 2017], TARDiS [Crooks et al 2016], Irmin [Farinier et al 2015], concurrent revisions [Burckhardt and Leijen 2011], GoT [Achar and Lopes 2019], are a few models that first store the incoming changes, and provide the programmer control over when these changes are resolved and introduced into the local state. From the point of view of the user of an interactive debugger observing reconciliation in these models, the user must both observe when information is received from a remote site, and when the information is accepted and incorporated in the local state.…”
Section: Exposing Changes Due To Reconciliation Ofmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, in the global sequence protocol (GSP) model [Burckhardt et al 2015;Gotsman and Burckhardt 2017], the operations that are distributed to all remote sites are placed in an pending queue, ready to be applied through an explicit primitive given to the local application. In TARDiS [Crooks et al 2016], concurrent writes are placed under version control in separate branches to avoid interfering with each other until one context wants to introduce these concurrent changes to its branch using the resolve primitive.…”
Section: Read Stabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%