TLA+ conference 2024

-

The TLA+ foundation got established last year in April as an independent, non-profit organization under the umbrella of the Linux Foundation. This April 15th, we colocated our annual TLA+ conference with the Linux OSSNA event to reach out to developers attending this event. Being under Linux Foundation, we didn't have to pay for the venue, but we paid $3K for professional recording of the sessions, so we can share the talks with the world at large. The videos will be available within a couple weeks. 


Marc Brooker: 15 years of TLA+

Marc Brooker gave the keynote this Monday in TLA+ conference 2024. His keynote was a good mix of inspiration for formal methods and challenging formal methods to do better. Brooker is a VP/distinguished engineer at AWS. He has been on-call for 15 years, and were involved with many popular AWS services, including Aurora, Lambda, EC2, EBS, API gateway, iot, bedrock. He defines himself as mostly a practitioner, building large scale distributed systems. Brooker's blog is a must-subscribe. His most recent blog post is a brief summary of this keynote talk, but do read on for my notes from his talk.

Image

Brooker started building circuits on breadboard in high-school, and started noticing the patterns in circuits, and got fascinated by realizing that with math we can quantify the output behavior of systems at design time, understand safety margins, and  understand system interactions. He found this so exciting, that after studying ECE, he started PhD on building distributed radar system. He was again delighted to see that using math they could predict the output of the system they are designing and building. 

Then we got into computer systems, and found that math was not there in the practice. A prevalent attitude in developing and operating computer systems was "it's just vibes, man!", and this was super disappointing to him.

To inject some rigor in to designs, he thought of modeling via distributed state machines, and asked his smarter colleagues, who recommended Alloy, Promela+Spin, and TLA+. He bought Leslie Lamport's book, and read all examples, and coded them, which completely changed his approach to thinking about these systems. They have explained the process and their experiences with TLA+ modeling in their  CACM 2015 article "how amazon web services uses formal methods". The paper is 6 pages long, and Broker says one of the most important part of the paper is Table 1. (I had gotten to see those specs when I was at AWS, and many more specs followed these since 2015.)

He was so transformed by these experiences that he is convinced that formal methods is one of the best engineering best practices. He says: If you’re a software engineer, especially one working on large-scale systems, distributed systems, or critical low-level system, and are not using formal methods as part of your approach, you’re probably wasting time and money. Because, ultimately, engineering is an exercise in optimizing for time and money.

"It would be well if engineering were less generally thought of, and even defined, as the art of constructing. In a certain important sense it is rather the art of not constructing; or, to define it rudely but not inaptly, it is the art of doing that well with one dollar, which any bungler can do with two after a fashion." Arthur Wellington

TLA+, rather than slowing things, accelerate engineering. Finding bugs earlier allows us to move faster. Formal methods also help us to optimize designs and protocols without risk, and crisply communicate exact reasoning.

In sum, Brooker believes formal methods are just good engineering practice! But this comes completely disconnected from many people's perception as we failed to communicate the value of this. How do we communicate this to them? Brooker says that's why he is excited about this field.

The present

Since the paper's publication TLA+ had been used for database services (Aurora, DynamoDB),  compute services (Lambda),  storage (EBS control plane physalia) and many other places

What caught Brooker by surprise was that: TLA+ role as an extremely precise format for protocol documentation was perhaps the most useful. 

In the present, AWS has a broad automated reasoning practice:

Personal 

Brooker says he continues to be excited about TLA+, and he uses P more and more often, and is learning Lean as well.

Future

Prediction 1: systems will continue to become more complex. (And soon their behavior will exceed human ability to reason about them.)

Prediction 2: systems will continue to become more critical. We saw this in our lives, and this snuck up on us in the last 30 years.

Prediction 3: cost, efficiency, sustainability, and productivity will become more important.

Prediction 4: AI will be a big deal.

Discussion

A quantitative understanding of system behavior is also sorely needed:

  • failure probabilities
  • latency and throughput distributions
  • system performance under different workloads
  • automatic optimization of system designs

It would be great to have faster exploration of the design space in an automated way. For example, there has been decades of debate on 2f+1 (Paxos) vs f+1 (chain) replication designs. Still there is no clear winner, because things are failure model and workload dependent. But given workload properties, matching design to workload should be trivial. So can we use automated tools to get an answer to this? A similar example is OCC vs locking concurrency control.

How do we reach working engineers (and working eng executives)?

Should tools get narrower and more specific? Is packaging and ui holding us back? Are we talking to decision makers about moving faster and with less risk?

Code vs model gap: people have been dismissive about this as this didn't turn out to be as bad as it sounds, but do we get any improvement on this. (Markus Kuppe's talk in the afternoon reported great progress on this problem.)

Brooker said model checking vs proof gap is not personally/practically much important to him, and that he remains to be extremely excited about TLA+.

Here are Brooker's slides from the keynote.


The rest of the day

We had four more industry talks in the morning. This was a big change/improvement over the previous years. We see accelarated adoption of TLA+ in the industry. Thousands seeds are sprouting in different companies, and that is really nice to see. We had great talks.

The companies (industrial use) have all the same basic story. They work on a problem/feature, which seem simple first, and gets captured initially by a couple paragraphs of description. But due to concurrency and nondeterminism, the cornercases keep popping up as they delve (not a chatbot I just like the word) in to the problem, and the document becomes a 40 page document many weeks later. When they are frustrated, out of desperation they pick up TLA+ modeling, which gives them assurance, and also simplifies the design. The good news is that you don't need advanced language features to be productive with TLA+ modeling. The modeling is the important thing, and you get very good return on investment on it. They are very happy about using TLA+, but as the implementation marches on they move on to other things, to pick up TLA+ another fateful Spring when the cycle repeats again for the next big feature/protocol/design they need to deliver. As I keep joking to Markus, the TLA+ stickers should say []<> rather than <>[], as the common use pattern seems to be always eventually using TLA+.


In the afternoon we had a session on advancements on TLA+ core concept and another on TLA+ ecosystem.

Image


Do check on the interactive TLA-web tool. I am excited about this, and many people in the audience were delighted watching the demo of this tool. 

Overall we had a really fun day. We topped this off with the TLA+ dinner, which was really friendly and colloquial. We walked to the waterfront, below the Pike Place, and dined at the crabpot sea food restaurant. We had an informal dinner, for a formal methods conference.

Image


What is next for TLA+? We should get our flywheel going. We should get more companies using it, which in turn would be creating demand for support/features, and the budding TLA+ ecosystem should be delivering them with funding. TLA+ ecosystem will stay strong and thrive only if we get more users with needs.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Hints for Distributed Systems Design

-
This is with apologies to Butler Lampson, who published the " Hints for computer system design " paper 40 years ago in SOSP'83. I don't claim to match that work of course. I just thought I could draft this post to organize my thinking about designing distributed systems and get feedback from others. I start with the same  disclaimer Lampson gave. These hints are not novel, not foolproof recipes, not laws of design, not precisely formulated, and not always appropriate. They are just hints.  They are context dependent, and some of them may be controversial. That being said, I have seen these hints successfully applied in distributed systems design throughout my 25 years in the field, starting from the theory of distributed systems (98-01), immersing into the practice of wireless sensor networks (01-11), and working on cloud computing systems both in the academia and industry ever since. These heuristic principles have been applied knowingly or unknowingly and has proven
Read more >>

Learning about distributed systems: where to start?

-
This is definitely not a "learn distributed systems in 21 days" post. I recommend a principled, from the foundations-up, studying of distributed systems, which will take a good three months in the first pass, and many more months to build competence after that. If you are practical and coding oriented you may not like my advice much. You may object saying, "Shouldn't I learn distributed systems with coding and hands on? Why can I not get started by deploying a Hadoop cluster, or studying the Raft code." I think that is the wrong way to go about learning distributed systems, because seeing similar code and programming language constructs will make you think this is familiar territory, and will give you a false sense of security. But, nothing can be further from the truth. Distributed systems need radically different software than centralized systems do.  --A. Tannenbaum This quotation is literally the first sentence in my distributed systems syllabus. Inst
Read more >>

Making database systems usable

-
Image
C. J. Date's Sigmod 1983 keynote, "Database Usability", was prescient. Usability is the most important thing to the customers. They care less about impressive benchmarks or clever algorithms, and more about whether they can operate and use a database efficiently to query, update, analyze, and persist their data with minimal headache. (BTW, does anyone have a link to the contents of this Sigmod'83 talk? There is no transcript around, except for this short abstract .) The paper we cover today is from Sigmod 2007. It takes on the database usability problem raised in that 1983 keynote head-on, and calls out that the king is still naked.  Let's give some context for the year 2007. Yes, XML format was still popular then. The use-case in the paper is XQuery. The paper does not contain any  reference to json. MongoDB would be released in 2009 with the document model; and that seems to be great timing for some of the usability pains mentioned in the paper! Web 2.0 was in
Read more >>

Looming Liability Machines (LLMs)

-
As part of our zoom reading group ( wow, 4.5 years old now ), we discussed a paper that uses LLMs for automatic root cause analysis (RCA) for cloud incidents. This was a pretty straightforward application of LLMs. The proposed system employs an LLM to match incoming incidents to incident handlers based on their alert types, predicts the incident's root cause category, and provides an explanatory narrative. The only customization is through prompt-engineering. Since this is a custom domain, I think a more principled and custom-designed  machine learning system would be more appropriate rather than adopting LLMs. Anyways, the use of LLMs for RCAs spooked me vicerally. I couldn't find the exact words during the paper discussion, but I can articulate this better now. Let me explain. RCA is serious business Root cause analysis (RCA) is the process of identifying the underlying causes of a problem/incident, rather than just addressing its symptoms. One RCA heuristic is asking 5 Why&#
Read more >>

Foundational distributed systems papers

-
I talked about the importance of reading foundational papers last week. To followup, here is my compilation of foundational papers in the distributed systems area. (I focused on the core distributed systems area, and did not cover networking, security, distributed ledgers, verification work etc. I even left out distributed transactions, I hope to cover them at a later date.)  I classified the papers by subject, and listed them in chronological order. I also listed expository papers and blog posts at the end of each section. Time and State in Distributed Systems Time, Clocks, and the Ordering of Events in a Distributed System. Leslie Lamport, Commn. of the ACM,  1978. Distributed Snapshots: Determining Global States of a Distributed System. K. Mani Chandy Leslie Lamport, ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 1985. Virtual Time and Global States of Distributed Systems.  Mattern, F. 1988. Practical uses of synchronized clocks in distributed systems. B. Liskov, 1991. Expository papers
Read more >>

Advice to the young

-
Image
I notice I haven't written any advice posts recently. Here is a collection of my advice posts pre 2020. I've been feeling all this elderly wisdom pent up in me, ready to pour at any moment. So here it goes. Get ready to quench your thirst from my fount of wisdom. No man, think for yourself, only get what works for you. It is called foundations, not theory Foundations of computer science (or rather any field of study) are the most important topics you can learn. These lay down the frame of thinking/perspective for that area of study. Yet, I am saddened to hear these called as "theory", and labeled as "unpractical". This couldn't be farther from the truth. Take a look at how I recommend studying distributed systems . Don't you dare call this "theory" and "unpractical". This lays the bedrock that you build your practice on. Don't skimp on the foundations. Don't build your home on quicksand. Keep your hands dirty, your mind cl
Read more >>

Linearizability: A Correctness Condition for Concurrent Objects

-
Image
This paper is from Herlihy and Wing appeared in ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 1990. This is the canonical reference for the linearizability definition. I had not read this paper in detail before, so I thought it would be good to go to the source to see if there are additional delightful surprises in the original text. Hence, this post. I will dive into a technical analysis of the paper first, and then discuss some of my takes toward the end. I had written an accessible explanation of linearizability earlier; you may want to read that first. I will assume an understanding of linearizability to keep this review at reasonable length. Introduction I love how the old papers just barge in with the model, without bothered by pleasantries such as motivation of the problem. These are the first two sentences of the introduction. "A concurrent system consists of a collection of sequential processes that communicate through shared typed objects . This model encompass
Read more >>

Scalable OLTP in the Cloud: What’s the BIG DEAL?

-
Image
This paper is from Pat Helland, the apostate philosopher of database systems, overall a superb person, and a good friend of mine. The paper appeared this week at CIDR'24. (Check out the program for other interesting papers). The motivating question behind this work is: " What are the asymptotic limits to scale for cloud OLTP (OnLine Transaction Processing) systems? " Pat says that the CIDR 2023 paper "Is Scalable OLTP in the Cloud a Solved Problem?" prompted this question.  The answer to the question? Pat says that the answer lies in the joint responsibility of database and the application. If you know of Pat's work, which I have summarized several in this blog , you would know that Pat has been advocating along these lines before. But this paper provides a very crisp, specific, concrete answer. Read on for my summary of the paper. Disclaimer: This is a wisdom and technical information/detail packed 13-page paper, so I will try my best to summarize the sa
Read more >>

Understanding the Performance Implications of Storage-Disaggregated Databases

-
Image
Storage-compute disaggregation in databases has emerged as a pivotal architecture in cloud environments, as evidenced by Amazon ( Aurora ), Microsoft ( Socrates ), Google (AlloyDB), Alibaba ( PolarDB ), and Huawei (Taurus). This approach decouples compute from storage, allowing for independent and elastic scaling of compute and storage resources. It provides fault-tolerance at the storage level. You can then share the storage for other services, such as adding read-only replicas for the databases. You can even use the storage level for easier sharding of your database. Finally, you can also use this for exporting a changelog asynchronously to feed into peripheral cloud services, such as analytics. Disaggregated architecture was the topic of Sigmod 23 panel . I think this quote summarizes the industry's thinking on the topic. "Disaggregated architecture is here, and is not going anywhere. In a disaggregated architecture, storage is fungible, and computing scales independently.
Read more >>

Designing Data Intensive Applications (DDIA) Book

-
Image
We started reading this book as part of Alex Petrov's book club . We just got started, so you can join us, by joining the discord channel above. We meet Wednesday's 11am Eastern Time.  Previously we had read transaction processing book by Grey and Reuters. This page links to my summaries of that book. Chp 1. Reliable, Scalable, and Maintainable Applications I love the diagrams opening each chapter. Beautiful! The first chapter consists of warm up stuff. It talks about the definitions of reliabilty, scalability, and maintainability. It is still engaging, because  it is written with an educator and technical blogger voice, rather than a dry academic voice. This book came out on 2017. Martin is working on the new version. So if you have comments for things to focus on for the new version, it would be helpful to collect them in a document and email it to Martin. For example, I am curious about how the below paragraph from the Preface will get revised with 8 more years of hindsight:
Read more >>