Formalising Reconciliation in Partitionable Networks with Distributed Services

  • Mikael Asplund
  • Simin Nadjm-Tehrani
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4157)


Modern command and control systems are characterised by computing services provided to several actors at different geographical locations. The actors operate on a common state that is modularly updated at distributed nodes using local data services and global integrity constraints for validity of data in the value and time domains. Dependability in such networked applications is measured through availability of the distributed services as well as the correctness of the state updates that should satisfy integrity constraints at all times. Providing support in middleware is seen as one way of achieving a high level of service availability and well-defined performance guarantees. However, most recent works [1,2] that address fault-aware middleware cover crash faults and provision of timely services, and assume network connectivity as a basic tenet.


Integrity Constraint Partitionable Network Partition State Reconciliation Process Snapshot Isolation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Szentivanyi, D., Nadjm-Tehrani, S.: Middleware Support for Fault Tolerance. In: Middleware for Communications. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Felber, P., Narasimhan, P.: Experiences, strategies, and challenges in building fault-tolerant corba systems. IEEE Trans. Comput. 53(5), 497–511 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    DeDiSys: European IST FP6 DeDiSys Project (2006),
  4. 4.
    Asplund, M., Nadjm-Tehrani, S.: Post-partition reconciliation protocols for maintaining consistency. In: Proceedings of the 21st ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Szentivanyi, D., Nadjm-Tehrani, S., Noble, J.M.: Optimal choice of checkpointing interval for high availability. In: Proceedings of the 11th Pacific Rim Dependable Computing Conference. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Spread: The Spread Toolkit (2006),
  7. 7.
    Saito, Y., Shapiro, M.: Optimistic replication. ACM Comput. Surv. 37(1), 42–81 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Davidson, S.B., Garcia-Molina, H., Skeen, D.: Consistency in a partitioned network: a survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 17(3), 341–370 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gray, J., Helland, P., O’Neil, P., Shasha, D.: The dangers of replication and a solution. In: SIGMOD 1996: Proceedings of the 1996 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data, pp. 173–182. ACM Press, New York (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Terry, D.B., Theimer, M.M., Petersen, K., Demers, A.J., Spreitzer, M.J., Hauser, C.H.: Managing update conflicts in bayou, a weakly connected replicated storage system. In: SOSP 1995: Proceedings of the fifteenth ACM symposium on Operating systems principles, pp. 172–182. ACM Press, New York (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Babaoglu, Ö., Bartoli, A., Dini, G.: Enriched view synchrony: A programming paradigm for partitionable asynchronous distributed systems. IEEE Trans. Comput. 46(6), 642–658 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moser, L.E., Melliar-Smith, P.M., Narasimhan, P.: Consistent object replication in the eternal system. Theor. Pract. Object Syst. 4(2), 81–92 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Narasimhan, P., Moser, L.E., Melliar-Smith, P.M.: Replica consistency of corba objects in partitionable distributed systems. Distributed Systems Engineering 4(3), 139–150 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fekete, A., Gupta, D., Luchangco, V., Lynch, N., Shvartsman, A.: Eventually-serializable data services. In: PODC 1996: Proceedings of the fifteenth annual ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing, pp. 300–309. ACM Press, New York (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lamport, L.: Time, clocks, and the ordering of events in a distributed system. Commun. ACM 21(7), 558–565 (1978)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lippe, E., van Oosterom, N.: Operation-based merging. In: SDE 5: Proceedings of the fifth ACM SIGSOFT symposium on Software development environments, pp. 78–87. ACM Press, New York (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kermarrec, A.M., Rowstron, A., Shapiro, M., Druschel, P.: The icecube approach to the reconciliation of divergent replicas. In: PODC 2001: Proceedings of the twentieth annual ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing, pp. 210–218. ACM Press, New York (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Preguiça, N., Shapiro, M., Matheson, C.: Semantics-based reconciliation for collaborative and mobile environments. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., Schmidt, D.C. (eds.) CoopIS 2003, DOA 2003, and ODBASE 2003. LNCS, vol. 2888, pp. 38–55. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Phatak, S.H., Nath, B.: Transaction-centric reconciliation in disconnected client-server databases. Mob. Netw. Appl. 9(5), 459–471 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Berenson, H., Bernstein, P., Gray, J., Melton, J., O’Neil, E., O’Neil, P.: A critique of ansi sql isolation levels. In: SIGMOD 1995: Proceedings of the 1995 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data, pp. 1–10. ACM Press, New York (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mikael Asplund
    • 1
  • Simin Nadjm-Tehrani
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer and Information ScienceLinköping UniversityLinköpingSweden

Personalised recommendations