Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Refactor the Quint specification after #144 #146

Merged
merged 20 commits into from
Aug 8, 2024

Conversation

konnov
Copy link
Collaborator

@konnov konnov commented Jul 5, 2024

What ❔

Following the pseudo-code updates in #144, this PR introduces updates in the Quint specification, namely, moving CommitQC into TimeoutQC and storing only high_commit_qc_view in TimeoutVote instead of storing high_commit_qc.

Why ❔

This update speeds-up model checking times dramatically, as CommitQC fields in TimeoutVote were a major bottleneck.

This change has broken multiple invariants. Hence, we have to further fix the specification and the invariants before merging.

Preliminary experiments show that the model checking times have improved dramatically. For instance, we were able to find the expected violation of agreement for N=6, F=1, and B=2.

@konnov
Copy link
Collaborator Author

konnov commented Jul 17, 2024

I have fixed committed_blocks_have_justification_inv today and the model checker has not found counterexamples today. So I will re-run the experiments to see whether all the invariants pass.

konnov added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 17, 2024
@konnov konnov changed the title WIP: Refactor the Quint specification after #144 Refactor the Quint specification after #144 Jul 27, 2024
@konnov konnov marked this pull request as ready for review July 30, 2024 07:50
@dnkolegov dnkolegov merged commit 354968a into main Aug 8, 2024
6 checks passed
@dnkolegov dnkolegov deleted the igor/quint-timeout-qc-refactor branch August 8, 2024 09:12
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants