Wyatt Lloyd
Michael J. Freedman
David G. Andersen
- Brewer, E. Towards robust distributed systems. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, (2000) Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Bronson, N., et al. TAO: Facebook's distributed data store for the social graph. In Proceedings of the Usenix Annual Technical Conference, (2013). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cham, J. PhD Comics (June 2013); http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1592.Google Scholar
- Corbett, J.C. et al. Spanner: Google's globally distributed database. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems 31, 3 (2013). Google ScholarDigital Library
- DeCandia, G., et al. Dynamo: Amazon's highly available key-value store. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM Symposium on OS Principles, (2007), 205--220. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gibson, G., Grider, G., Jacobson, A. and Lloyd, W. PRObE: A thousand-node experimental cluster for computer systems research. Usenix; login: 38, 3 (2013).Google Scholar
- Gilbert, S. and Lynch, N. Brewer's conjecture and the feasibility of consistent, available, partition-tolerant Web services. ACM SIGACT News 33, 2 (2002), 51--59. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lakshman, A. and Malik, P. Cassandra---a decentralized structured storage system. In The 3rd ACM SIGOPS International Workshop on Large-scale Distributed Systems and Middleware, (2009).Google Scholar
- Lamport, L. Time, clocks, and the ordering of events in a distributed system. Commun. ACM 21, 7 (July 1978), 558--565. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lipton, R.J. and Sandberg, J.S. PRAM: A scalable shared memory. Technical Report TR-180-88. Princeton University, Department of Computer Science, 1988.Google Scholar
- Lloyd, W., Freedman, M. J. and Kaminsky, M. and Andersen, D.G. Don't settle for eventual: Scalable causal consistency for wide-area storage with COPS. In Proceedings of the 23rd Symposium on Operating Systems Principles: (2011), 401--416. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lloyd, W., Freedman, M.J., Kaminsky, M. and Andersen, D.G. Stronger semantics for low-latency geo-replicated storage. In Proceedings of the 10th Usenix Conference on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (2013), 313--328. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lloyd, W. Stronger consistency and semantics for low-latency geo-replicated storage. Ph.D. Dissertation, 2013, Princeton University. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Santora, M. In hours, thieves took $45 million in ATM scheme. New York Times (May 9, 2013).Google Scholar
- Sovran, Y., Power, R., Aguilera, M.K. and Li, J. Transactional storage for geo-replicated systems. In Proceedings of the 23rd Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, (2011) 385--400. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Voldemort. 2013; http://project-voldemort.com.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Don't settle for eventual consistency
Recommendations
Don’t Settle for Eventual Consistency: Stronger properties for low-latency geo-replicated storage
ProvenanceGeo-replicated storage provides copies of the same data at multiple, geographically distinct locations. Facebook, for example, geo-replicates its data (profiles, friends lists, likes, etc.) to data centers on the east and west coasts of the United ...
Don't settle for eventual: scalable causal consistency for wide-area storage with COPS
SOSP '11: Proceedings of the Twenty-Third ACM Symposium on Operating Systems PrinciplesGeo-replicated, distributed data stores that support complex online applications, such as social networks, must provide an "always-on" experience where operations always complete with low latency. Today's systems often sacrifice strong consistency to ...
Constraining the eventual in eventual consistency
PaPoC '18: Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on the Principles and Practice of Consistency for Distributed DataCRDTs are highly available replicated data structures which offer strong eventual consistency in the face of concurrent operations [3]. By their definition, CRDTs eventually converge to a consistent state given enough time. However, this is not strict ...
Comments