Closed lemmy closed 1 month ago
Note this counterexample is also produced in the CI by https://github.com/microsoft/CCF/blob/main/tla/consistency/MCMultiNodeReadsNotLinearizable.cfg
I tried to make the original specs work with tla-web for a few hours yesterday. At the end, Will confirmed that "modules really just aren't implemented fully yet, so [a bogus behavior of tla-web is] likely a bug related to that."
For now, we will have to custom-tailor a spec for tla-web. This includes:
action
variableNext
For now, we will have to custom-tailor a spec for tla-web.
If you're happy to maintain it, that's fine. But we are not able to maintain it in its current state. If we can't find a way to automatically keep it in sync, there's a high chance we'll have to remove it when it gets stale.
Click here to interactively explore the 12-step counterexample documenting non-linearizability of read-only transactions in rare system conditions.
Related to https://github.com/microsoft/CCF/issues/5636
This PR adds a monolith version of our TLA+ Consistency spec to better document non-linearizability of read-only transactions in pathological system condition. A relevant counterexample can be interactively explored with tla-web. TLC's version of this counterexample follows:
Originally discovered by @heidihoward