Voting and relocation strategies preserving consistency among replicated files

  • Uwe M. Borghoff
Fault Tolerance
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 470)

Abstract

Replication can enhance the availability of the data files in a distributed environment. This paper introduces a method for managing replicated data files. Unlike many others, our method provides protocols and algorithms for a more complicated scheme of replication that supports replication with location-variant files and files with a variable degree of replication. We assume the existence of a dynamic file assignment algorithm as well as a block-oriented majority consensus voting approach.

This paper investigates how to maintain consistency during relocation, if the current and the new file assignment differ not only in the location of the files but also in the number of replicas. We introduce the basic relocation protocols to preserve consistency during relocation and present the read- and write-block algorithms for accesses to data blocks of transient files. As a final result, we show that the interaction between the relocation protocols and these algorithms preserves consistency.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    A. El Abbadi, D. Skeen, and F. Christian. An efficient, fault-tolerant algorithm for replicated data management. In Proc. 5th ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD Symp. on the Principles of Database Systems, pages 215–229, Portland, Ore., 1985.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    J. Akoka. Design of optimal distributed database systems. In Proc. 1st Int. Symp. on Distributed Data Base, pages 229–245, Paris, 1980.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    D. Barbara and H. Garcia-Molina. Optimizing the reliability provided by voting mechanism. In Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems, pages 340–346, San Francisco, Ca., October 1984.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    D. Barbara, H. Garcia-Molina, and A. Spauster. Policies for dynamic vote reassignment. In Proc. 6th Int. Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems, pages 37–44, Cambridge, MA, May 1986.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    D. Barbara, H. Garcia-Molina, and A. Spauster. Increasing availability under mutual exclusion constraints with dynamic vote reassignment. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 7(4):394–426, November 1989.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    P.A. Bernstein and N. Goodman. Concurrency control in distributed database systems. ACM Computing Surveys, 13(2):185–221, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    P.A. Bernstein and N. Goodman. A sophisticate's introduction to distributed database concurrency control. In Proc. 8th Conf. on Very Large Database, pages 62–76, September 1982.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    P.A. Bernstein and N. Goodman. An algorithm for concurrency control and recovery in replicated distributed databases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 9(4):596–615, 1984.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    J.J. Bloch, D.S. Daniels, and A.Z. Spector. Weighted voting for directories: A comprehensive survey. Technical Report CMU-CS-84-114, Carnegie-Mellon Univ., Stanford, Ca., April 1984.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    U.M. Borghoff. A priority-driven, consistency-preserving strategy for the relocation problem of replicated files. In Proc. 11th ITG/GI-Conf. — Architecture of Computing Systems, pages 365–375, Munich, West Germany, March 1990. VDE-Verlag.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    J.L. Carroll, D.D.E. Long, and J.-F. Pâris. Block-level consistency of replicated files. In Proc. 7th Int. Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems, pages 146–153, Berlin, West Germany, September 1987.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    R.G. Casey. Allocation of copies of a file in an information network. In Proc. AFIPS Conf., volume 40, pages 617–625, 1972.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    S.Y. Cheung, M. Ahamad, and M.H. Ammar. Optimizing vote and quorum assignments for reading and writing replicated data. IEEE Transactions an Knowledge and Data Engineering, 1:387–397, September 1989.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    S.Y. Cheung, M. Ahamad, and M.H. Ammar. Multi-dimensional voting: A general method for implementing synchronization in distributed systems. In Proc. 10th Int. Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems, pages 362–369, Paris, France, May 1990.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    W.W. Chu. Optimal file allocation in a multiple computer system. IEEE Transactions on Computers, c-18(10):885–889, October 1969.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    W.W. Chu. Optimal file allocation in a computer network. In N. Abramson and F. Kuo, editors, Computer Communication Networks, pages 82–84. Prentice Hall, Eaglewood Cliffs, N.J., 1973.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    B. Ciciani, D.M. Dias, and P.S. Yu. Analysis of replication in distributed database systems. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 2(2):247–261, June 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    D. Davĉev and W.A. Burkhard. Consistency and recovery control for replicated files. In Proc. 10th ACM Symp. on Operating Systems Principles, pages 87–96, Orcas Islands, December 1985.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    L.W. Dowdy and D.V. Foster. Comparative models of the file assignment problem. ACM Computing Surveys, 14(2):287–313, June 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    H. Garcia-Molina. Reliability issues for fully replicated distributed databases. IEEE Computer, 15(9):34–42, September 1982.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    H. Garcia-Molina and R.K. Abbott. Reliable distributed database management. Proc. of the IEEE, 75(5):601–620, May 1987.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    H. Garcia-Molina and D. Barbara. How to assign votes in a distributed system. Journal of the ACM, 32(4):841–860, August 1985.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    B. Gavish and O.R.L. Sheng. Dynamic file migration in distributed computer systems. Communications of the ACM, 33(2):177–189, February 1990.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    A.B. Gerbessiotis and J.G. Kollias. Towards an optimal allocation of fragments of relations. In R. Speth, editor, Research into Networks and Distributed Applications. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (North-Holland), ECSC, EEC, EAEC, Brussels and Luxembourg, 1988.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    D.K. Gifford. Weighted voting for replicated data. In Proc. 7th Symp. on Operating Systems Principles, pages 150–161, December 1979.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    N. Goodman, D. Skeen, A. Chan, U. Dayal, S. Fox, and D. Ries. A recovery algorithm for a distributed database system. In Proc. 2nd ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD Symp. on Principles of Database Systems, March 1983.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    M. Herlihy. A quorum-consensus replication method for abstract data types. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 4(1):32–53, February 1986.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    M. Herlihy. Dynamic quorum adjustment for partitioned data. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 12(2):170–194, June 1987.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    C.-L. Huang and V.O.K. Li. Regeneration-based multiversion dynamic voting scheme for replicated database systems. In Proc. 10th Int. Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems, pages 370–377, Paris, France, May 1990.Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    S. Jajodia. Managing replicated files in partitioned distributed database systems. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Data Engineering, pages 412–418, Los Angeles, Ca., February 1987.Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    S. Jajodia and D. Mutchler. Enhancements to the voting algorithm. In Proc. 13th Int. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases, pages 399–405, Brighton, 1987.Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    A. Kumar. Performance analysis of a hierarchical quorum consensus algorithm for replicated objects. In Proc. 10th Int. Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems, pages 378–385, Paris, France, May 1990.Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    B.W. Lampson and H.E. Sturgis. Crash recovery in a distributed data storage system. Technical report, Xerox Research Center, Palo Alto, Ca., 1979.Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    L.J. Laning and M.S. Leonard. File allocation in a distributed computer communication network. IEEE Transactions on Computers, c-32(3):232–244, March 1983.Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    K.D. Levin and H.L. Morgan. Optimizing distributed data bases — a framework for research. In Proc. AFIPS Conf., volume 44, pages 473–478, 1975.Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    D.D.E. Long. The management of replication in a distributed system. Technical Report UCSC/CRL 88/07, Univ. of California, Santa Cruz, 1988.Google Scholar
  37. [37]
    D.D.E. Long and J.-F. Pâris. On improving the availability of replicated files. In Proc. 6th Symp. on Reliability in Distributed Software and Database Systems, pages 77–83, March 1987.Google Scholar
  38. [38]
    S. Mahmoud and J.S. Riordon. Optimal allocation of resources in distributed information networks. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 1(1):66–78, March 1976.Google Scholar
  39. [39]
    H.L. Morgan and K.D. Levin. Optimal program and data locations in computer networks. Communications of the ACM, 20(5):315–321, 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. [40]
    J.-F. Pâris. Voting with witnesses: A consistency scheme for replicated files. In Proc. 6th Int. Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems, pages 606–620, Cambridge, MA, May 1986.Google Scholar
  41. [41]
    J.-F. Pâris. Efficient management of replicated data. In Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. on Database Theory, pages 386–409. LNCS #326, Springer Verlag, 1988.Google Scholar
  42. [42]
    J.-F. Pâris and D.D.E. Long. Efficient dynamic voting algorithms. In Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Data Engineering, pages 268–275, Los Angeles, February 1988.Google Scholar
  43. [43]
    K.R. Pattipati and J.L. Wolf. A file assignment problem model for extended local area network environments. In Proc. 10th Int. Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems, pages 554–561, Paris, France, May 1990.Google Scholar
  44. [44]
    R. Ramesh and B. Ryan. Optimal file allocation and report assignment in distributed information networks. Naval Research Logistics, 37(1):165–181, February 1990.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  45. [45]
    R. Renesse and A.S. Tanenbaum. Voting with ghosts. In Proc. 8th Int. Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems, pages 456–462, San Jose, Ca., June 1988.Google Scholar
  46. [46]
    D. Skeen. A quorum-based commit protocol. In Proc. 6th Berkeley Workshop on Distributed Data Management and Computer Networks, pages 69–80, Berkeley, Ca., February 1982.Google Scholar
  47. [47]
    R.H. Thomas. A majority consensus approach to concurrency control for multiple copy databases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 4(2):180–209, June 1979.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Uwe M. Borghoff
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für InformatikTechnische Universität MünchenMünchen 2West Germany

Personalised recommendations