You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Parse all the trace files: trace-* and carry out the reconciliation logic with vector clock.
Each Event type in the trace file should have timestamp = process_name:path_id:vector_clock. The vector clocks of each event can be reproduced easily in this case.
Using the vector clock, it can be determined which event happened before and after. All the paths can be parsed into a Graph with edges, indicating a happened before relationship. This will be useful when we do DFS validation logic later on.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi Khanh, for this issue, I am planning to take two steps, one is to merge the k sorted array into a linearizable one based on the vector clock, then covert the single array to a tree (this part might be more challenging). Do you think if that is the right path to proceed? Thank you.
I think that sounds reasonable! But I think it would be more fruitful for us to use a graph DS in this case since some events might happen concurrently. I think topological sort can come in handy (thou I vaguely remember the algorithm itself).
Parse all the trace files:
trace-*
and carry out the reconciliation logic with vector clock.Each
Event
type in the trace file should have timestamp =process_name:path_id:vector_clock
. The vector clocks of each event can be reproduced easily in this case.Using the vector clock, it can be determined which event happened before and after. All the paths can be parsed into a Graph with edges, indicating a happened before relationship. This will be useful when we do DFS validation logic later on.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: