SkewCCC+: A Heterogeneous Distributed Hash Table

  • Marcin Bienkowski
  • André Brinkmann
  • Marek Klonowski
  • Miroslaw Korzeniowski
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6490)


Distributed Hash Tables (DHTs) enable fully distributed Peer-to-Peer network construction and maintenance with name-driven routing. There exist very few DHT approaches that consider heterogeneity of nodes inside the construction process or properly serve data of different load. To our best knowledge, there is no construction which smoothly addresses both these issues.

We propose a Peer-to-Peer construction that explicitly uses heterogeneity to simplify the routing and maintenance process even in the presence of an adaptive adversary. Using a hypercube and cube connected cycles networks as a backbone, we show how to cope with two types of heterogeneity: one for nodes and one for data.


Hash Function Data Item Distribute Hash Table Virtual Node Neighboring Ring 
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.
    Aberer, K., Cudré-Mauroux, P., Datta, A., Despotovic, Z., Hauswirth, M., Punceva, M., Schmidt, R.: P-grid: a self-organizing structured p2p system. SIGMOD Record 32(3), 29–33 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adler, M., Halperin, E., Karp, R., Vazirani, V.: A stochastic process on the hypercube with applications to peer-to-peer networks. In: Proc. of the 35th ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing (STOC), pp. 575–584 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aspnes, J., Shah, G.: Skip graphs. ACM Transactions on Algorithms 3(4) (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Awerbuch, B., Scheideler, C.: Group spreading: A protocol for provably secure distributed name service. In: Díaz, J., Karhumäki, J., Lepistö, A., Sannella, D. (eds.) ICALP 2004. LNCS, vol. 3142, pp. 183–195. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Awerbuch, B., Scheideler, C.: The hyperring: a low-congestion deterministic data structure for distributed environments. In: Proc. of the 15th ACM-SIAM Symp. on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pp. 318–327 (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bharambe, A.R., Agrawal, M., Seshan, S.: Mercury: supporting scalable multi-attribute range queries. In: Proc. of the ACM SIGCOMM, pp. 353–366 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bhargava, A., Kothapalli, K., Riley, C., Scheideler, C., Thober, M.: Pagoda: a dynamic overlay network for routing, data management, and multicasting. In: Proc. of the 16th ACM Symp. on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures (SPAA), pp. 170–179 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bienkowski, M., Brinkmann, A., Korzeniowski, M.: Degree 3 suffices: A large-scale overlay for P2P networks. In: Baker, T.P., Bui, A., Tixeuil, S. (eds.) OPODIS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5401, pp. 184–196. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brinkmann, A., Salzwedel, K., Scheideler, C.: Compact, adaptive placement schemes for non-uniform requirements. In: Proc. of the 14th ACM Symp. on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures, SPAA (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Durand, M., Flajolet, P.: Loglog counting of large cardinalities. In: Di Battista, G., Zwick, U. (eds.) ESA 2003. LNCS, vol. 2832, pp. 605–617. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Girdzijauskas, S., Datta, A., Aberer, K.: Structured overlay for heterogeneous environments: Design and evaluation of oscar. ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems 5(1) (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Godfrey, P., Stoica, I.: Heterogeneity and load balance in distributed hash tables. In: Proc. of the 24th IEEE INFOCOM (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Guerraoui, R., Handurukande, S.B., Huguenin, K., Kermarrec, A.-M., Fessant, F.L., Riviere, E.: Gosskip, an efficient, fault-tolerant and self organizing overlay using gossip-based construction and skip-lists principles. In: Peer-to-Peer Computing, pp. 12–22 (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Harvey, N.J.A., Jones, M.B., Saroiu, S., Theimer, M., Wolman, A.: Skipnet: a scalable overlay network with practical locality properties. In: Proc. of the 4th USENIX Symposium on Internet Technologies and Systems (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Karger, D., Lehman, E., et al.: Consistent hashing and random trees: Distributed caching protocols for relieving hot spots on the world wide web. In: Proc. of the 29th ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, STOC (1997)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kuhn, F., Schmid, S., Wattenhofer, R.: A self-repairing peer-to-peer system resilient to dynamic adversarial churn. In: van Renesse, R. (ed.) IPTPS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3640, pp. 13–23. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leighton, F.: Introduction to parallel algorithms and architectures: arrays, trees, hypercubes. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (1992)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liang, J., Kumar, R., Ross, K.: The kazaa overlay: A measurement study. In: Proceedings of the 19th IEEE Annual Computer Communications Workshop (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Malkhi, D., Naor, M., Ratajczak, D.: Viceroy: A scalable and dynamic emulation of the butterfly. In: Proc. of the 21st ACM Symp. on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC), pp. 183–192 (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Naor, M., Wieder, U.: Novel architectures for P2P applications: The continuous-discrete approach. ACM Transactions on Algorithms 3(3) (2007); Also appeared in Proc. of the 15th SPAA, pp. 50–59 (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ratnasamy, S., Francis, P., Handley, M., Karp, R.M., Shenker, S.: A scalable content-addressable network. In: Proc. of the ACM SIGCOMM, pp. 161–172 (2001)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stoica, I., Morris, R., Liben-Nowell, D., Karger, D.R., Kaashoek, M.F., Dabek, F., Balakrishnan, H.: Chord: a scalable peer-to-peer lookup protocol for internet applications. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 11(1), 17–32 (2003); Also appeared in Proc.of the ACM SIGCOMM, pp. 149–160 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Xiao, L., Zhuang, Z., Liu, Y.: Dynamic layer management in superpeer architectures. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 16(11), 1078–1091 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yang, B., Garcia-Molina, H.: Designing a super-peer network. In: Proc. of the 19th International Conference on Data Engineering, ICDE (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcin Bienkowski
    • 1
  • André Brinkmann
    • 2
  • Marek Klonowski
    • 3
  • Miroslaw Korzeniowski
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of Computer ScienceUniversity of WrocławPoland
  2. 2.Paderborn Center for Parallel Computing PC2University of PaderbornGermany
  3. 3.Inst. of Mathematics and Computer ScienceWrocław Univ. of TechnologyPoland

Personalised recommendations