Layers as knowledge transitions in the design of distributed systems

Janssen, Wil

doi:10.1007/3-540-60630-0_12

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Changes in systems, that is, transitions, correspond to changes in knowledge of processes. In [25] we see how every knowledge modification of a set of processes can be implemented as a layer. These layers are then composed using so-called layer composition.…”

Section: Communication-closure As Design Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

Communication-Closed Layers as Paradigm for Distributed Systems: A Manifesto

Drăgoi¹,

Lazić²,

Widder³

2018

Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference - Sinteza 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Distributed computations are characterized by a partial order over events: two concurrent events at different processes may be re-ordered without changing the outcome of the computation. For systems that are composed of so-called communication-closed layers, this partial-order argument has been used by Elrad and Francez [13] to reduce the reasoning about distributed systems to a specific sequential form. We discuss existing techniques for communicationclosed layers, and discuss applications to automated verification of state-ofthe-art distributed systems.

show abstract

Section: Communication-closure As Design Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

Communication-Closed Layers as Paradigm for Distributed Systems: A Manifesto

Drăgoi¹,

Lazić²,

Widder³

2018

Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference - Sinteza 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Formally, our propositional language L is not expressive enough to define ≀ as a guard because formulas are not capable of refering to channel contents. The operation " * " represents layered composition following Janssen et al [Jan95]. Layering statements of distinct processes is essentially the same as parallel composition whereas layering of statements of the same process corresponds to sequential composition.…”

Section: Syntaxmentioning

confidence: 99%

Causing communication closure: safe program composition with reliable non-FIFO channels

Engelhardt

Moses

2009

Distrib. Comput.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A semantic framework for analyzing safe composition of distributed programs is presented. Its applicability is illustrated by a study of program composition when communication is reliable but not necessarily FIFO. In this model, special care must be taken to ensure that messages do not accidentally overtake one another in the composed program. We show that barriers do not exist in this model. Indeed, no program that sends or receives messages can automatically be composed with arbitrary programs without jeopardizing their intended behavior. Safety of composition becomes context-sensitive and new tools are needed for ensuring it. A notion of sealing is defined, where if a program P is immediately followed by a program Q that seals P then P will be communication-closed-it will execute as if it runs in isolation. The investigation of sealing in this model reveals a novel connection between Lamport causality and safe composition. A characterization of sealable programs is given, as well as efficient algorithms for testing if Q seals P and for constructing a seal for a significant class of programs. It is shown that every sealable program that is open to interference on O(n 2 ) channels can be sealed using O(n) messages.

show abstract

“…Hence, reasoning about P can be reduced to reasoning about each of its layers in isolation. This approach has been investigated further and applied to a variety of problems [1,10,16,8,18,9,13,14]. An introductory exposition to the proof technique based on communication-closed layers can be found in [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safe Composition of Distributed Programs Communicating over Order-Preserving Imperfect Channels

Engelhardt

Moses

2005

Distributed Computing – IWDC 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The fundamental question considered in this paper is when program Q, if executed immediately after program P, is guaranteed not to interfere with P and be safe from interference by P. If a message sent by one of these programs is received by the other, it may affect and modify the other's execution. The notion of communication-closed layers (CCLs) introduced by Elrad and Francez in 1982 is a useful tool for studying such interference. CCLs have been considered mainly in the context of reliable FIFO channels (without duplication), where one can design program layers that do not interfere with any other layer. When channels are less than perfect such programs are no longer feasible. The absence of interference between layers becomes context-dependent. In this paper we study the impact of message duplication and loss on the safety of layer composition. Using a communication phase operator, the fits after relation among programs is defined. If program Q fits after P then P and Q will not interfere with each other in executions of P * Q (P immediately followed by Q). For programs P and Q in a natural class of programs we outline efficient algorithms for the following: (1) deciding whether Q fits after P; (2) deciding whether Q seals P, meaning that Q fits after P and no following program can communicate with P; and (3) constructing a separator S that both fits after P and satisfies that Q fits after P * S .

show abstract

Layers as knowledge transitions in the design of distributed systems

Cited by 6 publications

References 24 publications

Communication-Closed Layers as Paradigm for Distributed Systems: A Manifesto

Communication-Closed Layers as Paradigm for Distributed Systems: A Manifesto

Causing communication closure: safe program composition with reliable non-FIFO channels

Safe Composition of Distributed Programs Communicating over Order-Preserving Imperfect Channels

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About