Thank you, dgacmu! We are currently working on a TLA+ specification with master's students, and we plan to verify it with TLC and Apalache. I discovered that Iulian's TLA+ specification was missing a ballot variable [1] by injecting a trace, because exhaustive exploration was not tractable. Therefore, state-space explosion is likely to become a problem (systems of interest contain 7–9 processes with non‑transitive conflicts). In that case, intermediate abstractions will be necessary, which may naturally lead us to theorem proving.
Once the specification is ready, I'll post about it here. :)
Lamport simply calls his protocol "Paxos" to refer to both the single‑decree and multi‑decree versions. This is also the case in his other works, e.g., "Fast Paxos" and "Generalized Paxos." The term "Multi‑Paxos" is a later community/industry shorthand for the repeated or optimized use of single‑decree Paxos.
Same here. The only clue I found are the following two lines in the Q/A section: "What consistency model does YDB use? To read data, YDB uses a model of strict data consistency."
sshell inherits the limitations of the FaaS infrastructure, including the time limit. Regarding the big data use case, more work is necessary to assess this, but the applications we have written so far were competing both in terms of efficiency and pricing (Section 5 in [1]).
Very interesting work, thanks for the link! We actually missed it among the references in our paper [1] and will correct this in the journal version. Regarding the differences, lsh has an interactive mode but not sshell. On the other hand, sshell compile to native (to support massively parallel calls), and IPCs between such calls (thanks to the DSO layer).
Once the specification is ready, I'll post about it here. :)
[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.10917