<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Blazes: Coordination Analysis for Distributed Programs · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1309.3324/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1309.3324/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Blazes: Coordination Analysis for Distributed Programs — mentioned by jamii</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8234630</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1309.3324:8234630</guid><pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2014 20:45:38 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; That&amp;#x27;s /why/ we have our programs and processes divided into boxes http://db.cs.berkeley.edu/papers/cidr11-bloom.pdf - by unboxing distributed systems we can statically predict whether a given program is eventually consistent (http://arxiv.org/abs/1309.3324 - and automatically add coordination protocols where necessary) http://db.cs.berkeley.edu/papers/dbtest12-bloom.pdf - by unboxing distributed systems we can use static analysis to more efficiently explore the space of message interleavings in unit tests https://infosys.uni-saarland.de/projects/octopusdb.php - by unboxing storage…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1309.3324/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.DC</category></item></channel></rss>
