I think the question is whether this particular CRDT has any notion of transactions to make sure the database is left in a consistent state after a merge. As I

I think the question is whether this particular CRDT has any notion of transactions to make sure the database is left in a consistent state after a merge. As I understand it, the only guarantee we get from all CRDTs is that all copies end up in the same state irrespective of merge order. And then there are some trivial examples, like counters, where this state is also logically consistent. But that is not guaranteed in general. So what about the classical example of transferring an amount from account A to account B if account A has sufficient funds? I think for a CRDT to support such cases (for arbitrary schemas) it would have to have some notion of atomicity and some way to specify preconditions.