|
|
|
|
|
|
by rystsov
2219 days ago
|
|
|
Hi Kyle, thanks for the Elle :) I want to use Elle to check long histories of transactions over small set of keys with read dominant workload, the paper recommends to use lists over registers but when the history becomes long on the one hand it becomes too wasteful to read the register's history on each request on the other hand the Elle's input becomes very large. E.g. when each read should return the whole register's history the size of history grows O(n^2) compared to the case when the reads return just the head. So I'm curios how would you have described the ability of finding violations with Elle using read-write registers with unique values vs the append-only lists? |
|
|
If you look at Elle's transaction generators, you can cap the size of any individual key, and use an uneven (e.g. exponential) distribution of key choices to get various frequencies. That way keys stay reasonably small (I use 1-10K writes/key), some keys are updated frequently to catch race conditions, and others last hundreds of seconds to catch long-lasting errors.
So I'm curios how would you have described the ability of finding violations with Elle using read-write registers with unique values vs the append-only lists?
RW registers are significantly weaker, though I don't know how to quantify the difference. I've still caught errors with registers, but the grounds for inferring anomalies are a.) less powerful and b.) can only be applied in certain circumstances--we talk about some of these details in the paper.