3

I'm working on modelling a primary-backup protocol in TLA+, and have the replication configuration in a tuple. Some setup TLA+:

NNodes == 3
Nodes == 1..NNodes

Then, in a Pluscal algorithm:

config = << 1, 2, 3 >>;
healthy = [ n \in Nodes |-> TRUE ];

I have a process which sets the values in healthy to FALSE, and want another process which removes the entries from config based on whether healthy is FALSE while preserving the order of the remaining entries in config.

If config was a set, removing the unhealthy entries would trivial, but I'm looking for a good way to do that with a tuple. I can use Append in a loop, but that causes a lot of extra states for TLC to deal with. Any better ways in TLA+ or Pluscal?

Ideally the solution wouldn't assume that the entries in config start off in sorted order, but I could work around that limitation.

Marc Brooker
  • 463
  • 3
  • 7

2 Answers2

5

The Sequences module contains the SelectSeq operator, which solves your exact use case. It will look something like

SelectSeq(config, LAMBDA x: healthy[x])

See page 341 of Specifying Systems.

Hovercouch
  • 1,962
  • 12
  • 12
0

Does the order of config elements matter? Otherwise I'd propose to replace it with a set config = {1,2,3}. You can easily filter the set as set difference config \ {2}.

lambda.xy.x
  • 4,918
  • 24
  • 35
  • Yes, order does matter. I've been trying to figure our how to filter the tuple as a set, then re-order according to the order in the original tuple, but can't find a method that doesn't make TLC sad. – Marc Brooker Apr 13 '19 at 18:54