Consensus in One Communication Step

  • Francisco Brasileiro
  • Fabíola Greve
  • Achour Mostefaoui
  • Michel Raynal
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2127)

Abstract

This paper presents a very simple consensus protocol that converges in a single communication step in favorable circumstances. Those situations occur when “enough” processes propose the same value. (“Enough” means “at least (n - f)” where f is the maximum number of processes that can crash in a set of n processes). The protocol requires f < n/3. It is shown that this requirement is necessary. Moreover, if all the processes that propose a value do propose the same value, the protocol always terminates in one communication step. It is also shown that additional assumptions can help weaken the f < n/3 requirement to f < n/2.

Keywords

Asynchronous Distributed System Consensus Crash Failure Message Passing 

References

  1. 1.
    Aguilera M.K. and Toueg S., Failure Detection and Randomization: a Hybrid Approach to Solve Consensus. SIAM Journal of Computing, 28(3):890–903, 1998.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ben-Or M., Another Advantage of Free Choice: Completely Asynchronous Agreement Protocols. 2nd ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, (PODC’83), Montréal (CA), pp. 27–30, 1983.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chandra T. and Toueg S., Unreliable Failure Detectors for Reliable Distributed Systems. Journal of the ACM, 43(2):225–267, 1996.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fischer M.J., Lynch N. and Paterson M.S., Impossibility of Distributed Consensus with One Faulty Process. Journal of the ACM, 32(2):374–382, 1985.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gray J. and Reuter A., Transaction Processing: Concepts and Techniques. Morgan Kaufmann, 1993.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Guerraoui R., Hurfin M., Mostefaoui A., Oliveira R., Raynal M. and Schiper A., Consensus in Asynchronous Distributed Systems: a Concise Guided Tour. In Advances in Distributed Systems, Springer-Verlag LNCS #1752 (Krakowiak S. and Shrivastava S. Eds), pp. 33–47, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mostefaoui A., Rajsbaum S. and Raynal M., Conditions on Input Vectors for Consensus Solvability in Asynchronous Distributed Systems. Proc. 33rd ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC’01), ACM Press, Crete (Greece), July 2001.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mostefaoui A., Rajsbaum S., Raynal M. and Roy M., A Hierarchy of Conditions for Consensus Solvability. Proc. 20th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC’01), ACM Press, Newport (RI), August 2001.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mostefaoui A., Rajsbaum S., Raynal M. and Roy M., Condition-Based Protocols for Set Agreement Problems. Research Report #1393, IRISA, University of Rennes, France, April 2001, 21 pages. http://www.irisa.fr/bibli/publi/pi/2001/1393/1393.html.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mostefaoui A., Rajsbaum S., Raynal M. and Roy M., Efficient Condition-Based Consensus. 8th Int. Colloquium on Structural Information and Communication Complexity (SIROCCO’00), Carleton Univ. Press, Val de Nuria, Catalonia (Spain), June 2001.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mostéfaoui A. and Raynal M., Solving Consensus Using Chandra-Toueg’s Unreliable Failure Detectors: a General Quorum-Based Approach. 13th Int. Symposium on DIStributed Computing (DISC’99), Springer-Verlag LNCS #1693 (P. Jayanti Ed.), pp. 49–63, 1999.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mostéfaoui A., Raynal M. and Tronel F., The Best of Both Worlds: a Hybrid Approach to Solve Consensus. Int. Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN’00, Formerly FTCS), IEEE Computer Society Press, New-York City, pp. 513–522, June 2000.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francisco Brasileiro
    • 1
  • Fabíola Greve
    • 1
  • Achour Mostefaoui
    • 1
  • Michel Raynal
    • 1
  1. 1.IRISA, Université de Rennes 1RennesFrance

Personalised recommendations