Fault-Tolerant Aggregation: Flow-Updating Meets Mass-Distribution

  • Paulo Sérgio Almeida
  • Carlos Baquero
  • Martín Farach-Colton
  • Paulo Jesus
  • Miguel A. Mosteiro
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7109)


Flow-Updating (FU) is a fault-tolerant technique that has proved to be efficient in practice for the distributed computation of aggregate functions in communication networks where individual processors do not have access to global information. Previous distributed aggregation protocols, based on repeated sharing of input values (or mass) among processors, sometimes called Mass-Distribution (MD) protocols, are not resilient to communication failures (or message loss) because such failures yield a loss of mass.

In this paper, we present a protocol which we call Mass-Distribution with Flow-Updating (MDFU). We obtain MDFU by applying FU techniques to classic MD. We analyze the convergence time of MDFU showing that stochastic message loss produces low overhead. This is the first convergence proof of an FU-based algorithm. We evaluate MDFU experimentally, comparing it with previous MD and FU protocols, and verifying the behavior predicted by the analysis. Finally, given that MDFU incurs a fixed deviation proportional to the message-loss rate, we adjust the accuracy of MDFU heuristically in a new protocol called MDFU with Linear Prediction (MDFU-LP). The evaluation shows that both MDFU and MDFU-LP behave very well in practice, even under high rates of message loss and even changing the input values dynamically.


Aggregate computation Distributed computing Radio networks Communication networks 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Akyildiz, I.F., Su, W., Sankarasubramaniam, Y., Cyirci, E.: Wireless sensor networks: A survey. Computer Networks 38(4), 393–422 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Almeida, P., Baquero, C., Farach-Colton, M., Jesus, P., Mosteiro, M.A.: Fault-tolerant aggregation: Flow-updating meets mass-distribution, arXiv:1109.4373v1 (September 2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bawa, M., Garcia-Molina, H., Gionis, A., Motwani, R.: Estimating aggregates on a peer-to-peer network. Technical report, Stanford University, Database group (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boyd, S., Ghosh, A., Prabhakar, B., Shah, D.: Randomized gossip algorithms. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 14(SI), 2508–2530 (2006)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen, J.-Y., Hu, J.: Analysis of distributed random grouping for aggregate computation on wireless sensor networks with randomly changing graphs. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distr. Syst. 19(8), 1136–1149 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, J.-Y., Pandurangan, G., Hu, J.: Brief announcement: locality-based aggregate computation in wireless sensor networks. In: PODC 2009: Proceedings of the 28th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pp. 298–299. ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen, J.-Y., Pandurangan, G., Xu, D.: Robust computation of aggregates in wireless sensor networks: distributed randomized algorithms and analysis. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distr. Syst. 17(9), 987–1000 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Clementi, A.E.F., Pasquale, F., Monti, A., Silvestri, R.: Communication in dynamic radio networks. In: Proc. 26th Ann. ACM Symp. on Principles of Distributed Computing, pp. 205–214 (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dimakis, A.G., Sarwate, A.D., Wainwright, M.J.: Geographic gossip: Efficient averaging for sensor networks. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 56(3), 1205–1216 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Erdos, P., Renyi, A.: On random graphs–i. Publicationes Matematicae 6, 290–297 (1959)MATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fernández Anta, A., Mosteiro, M.A., Thraves, C.: An early-stopping protocol for computing aggregate functions in sensor networks. In: Proc. of the IEEE 15th Pacific Rim International Symposium on Dependable Computing, pp. 357–364 (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gasieniec, L.: Randomized gossiping in radio networks. In: Kao, M.-Y. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Algorithms. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gupta, I., van Renesse, R., Birman, K.P.: Scalable fault-tolerant aggregation in large process groups. In: DSN, pp. 433–442. IEEE Computer Society (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Heidemann, J.S., Silva, F., Intanagonwiwat, C., Govindan, R., Estrin, D., Ganesan, D.: Building efficient wireless sensor networks with low-level naming. In: SOSP, pp. 146–159 (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Intanagonwiwat, C., Govindan, R., Estrin, D., Heidemann, J., Silva, F.: Directed diffusion for wireless sensor networking. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 11(1), 2–16 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Intanagonwiwat, C., Estrin, D., Govindan, R., Heidemann, J.S.: Impact of network density on data aggregation in wireless sensor networks. In: ICDCS, pp. 457–458 (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jelasity, M., Montresor, A., Babaoglu, O.: Gossip-based aggregation in large dynamic networks. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems 23(3), 219–252 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jesus, P., Baquero, C., Almeida, P.S.: Fault-tolerant aggregation for dynamic networks. In: Proc. of the 29th IEEE Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems, pp. 37–43 (2010)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jesus, P., Baquero, C., Almeida, P.S.: Fault-Tolerant Aggregation by Flow Updating. In: Senivongse, T., Oliveira, R. (eds.) DAIS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5523, pp. 73–86. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kempe, D., Dobra, A., Gehrke, J.: Gossip-based computation of aggregate information. In: Proc. of the 44th IEEE Ann. Symp. on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 482–491 (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kollios, G., Byers, J.W., Considine, J., Hadjieleftheriou, M., Li, F.: Robust aggregation in sensor networks. IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin 28(1), 26–32 (2005)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kowalski, D.R., Pelc, A.: Time complexity of radio broadcasting: adaptiveness vs. obliviousness and randomization vs. determinism. Theoretical Computer Science 333, 355–371 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Krishnamachari, B., Estrin, D., Wicker, S.B.: The impact of data aggregation in wireless sensor networks. In: ICDCS Workshops, pp. 575–578. IEEE Computer Society (2002)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Madden, S., Franklin, M.J., Hellerstein, J.M., Hong, W.: Tag: a tiny aggregation service for ad-hoc sensor networks. In: Proc. of the 5th Symp. on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, pp. 131–146 (2002)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Madden, S., Szewczyk, R., Franklin, M.J., Culler, D.: Supporting aggregate queries over ad-hoc wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the Fourth IEEE Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications, p. 49 (2002)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nath, S., Gibbons, P.B., Seshan, S., Anderson, Z.R.: Synopsis diffusion for robust aggregation in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems, pp. 250–262 (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Olfati-Saber, R., Murray, R.M.: Consensus problems in networks of agents with switching topology and time-delays. Transactions on Automatic Control 49(9), 1520–1533 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rentala, P., Musumuri, R., Saxena, U., Gandham, S.: Survey on sensor networks,
  29. 29.
    Scherber, D.S., Papadopoulos, H.C.: Locally constructed algorithms for distributed computations in ad-hoc networks. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, pp. 11–19 (2004)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sinclair, A., Jerrum, M.: Approximate counting, uniform generation and rapidly mixing markov chains. Information and Computation 82(1), 93–133 (1989)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Spanos, D., Olfati-Saber, R., Murray, R.: Dynamic consensus on mobile networks. In: 16th IFAC World Congress (2005)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Xiao, L., Boyd, S.: Fast linear iterations for distributed average. Systems and Control Letters 53, 65–78 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Xiao, L., Boyd, S., Lall, S.: A scheme for robust distributed sensor fusion based on average consensus. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, pp. 63–70 (2005)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Xiao, L., Boyd, S., Lall, S.: A Space-Time Diffusion Scheme for Peer-to-Peer Least-Squares Estimation. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, pp. 168–176 (2006)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Zhao, J., Govindan, R., Estrin, D.: Computing aggregates for monitoring wireless sensor networks. In: Proc. of the 1st IEEE Intl. Workshop on Sensor Network Protocols and Applications, pp. 139–148 (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paulo Sérgio Almeida
    • 1
  • Carlos Baquero
    • 1
  • Martín Farach-Colton
    • 2
    • 3
  • Paulo Jesus
    • 1
  • Miguel A. Mosteiro
    • 2
    • 4
  1. 1.Depto. de Informática (CCTC-DI)Universidade do MinhoBragaPortugal
  2. 2.Dept. of Computer ScienceRutgers UniversityPiscatawayUSA
  3. 3.Tokutek, Inc.USA
  4. 4.LADyR, GSyCUniversidad Rey Juan CarlosMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations