Skip to main content

Participant-Restricted Consensus in Asynchronous Crash-Prone Read/Write Systems and Its Weakest Failure Detector

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Parallel Computing Technologies (PaCT 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 11657))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 557 Accesses

Abstract

A failure detector is a device (object) that provides the processes with information on failures. Failure detectors were introduced to enrich asynchronous systems so that it becomes possible to solve problems (or implement concurrent objects) that are otherwise impossible to solve in pure asynchronous systems where processes are prone to crash failures. The most famous failure detector (which is called “eventual leader” and denoted \(\varOmega \)) is the weakest failure detector which allows consensus to be solved in n-process asynchronous systems where up to \(t=n-1\) processes may crash in the read/write communication model, and up to \(t<n/2\) processes may crash in the message-passing communication model. In these models, all correct processes are supposed to participate in a consensus instance and in particular the eventual leader.

This paper considers the case where some subset of processes that do not crash (not predefined in advance) are allowed not to participate in a consensus instance. In this context \(\varOmega \) cannot be used to solve consensus as it could elect as eventual leader a non-participating process. This paper presents the weakest failure detector that allows correct processes not to participate in a consensus instance.This failure detector, denoted \(\varOmega ^*\), is a variant of \(\varOmega \). The paper presents also an \(\varOmega ^*\)-based consensus algorithm for the asynchronous read/write model, in which any number of processes may crash, and not all the correct processes are required to participate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Afek, Y., Attiya, H., Dolev, D., Gafni, E., Merritt, M., Shavit, N.: Atomic snapshots of shared memory. JACM 40(4), 873–890 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson, J.: Multi-writer composite registers. Distrib. Comput. 7(4), 175–195 (1994)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Attiya, H., Welch, J.L.: Distributed Computing: Fundamentals, Simulations and Advanced Topics, 2nd edn. Wiley-Interscience, p. 414 (2004). ISBN 0-471-45324-2

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ben-Or, M.: Another advantage of free choice: completely asynchronous agreement protocols. In: Proceedings of 2nd ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC 1983), pp. 27–30. ACM Press (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chandra, T., Hadzilacos, V., Toueg, S.: The weakest failure detector for solving consensus. J. ACM 43(4), 685–722 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Chandra, T., Toueg, S.: Unreliable failure detectors for reliable distributed systems. J. ACM 43(2), 225–267 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Delporte-Gallet, C., Fauconnier, H., Guerraoui, R.: Tight failure detection bounds on atomic object implementations. J. ACM 57(4), 32 (2010). Article 22

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Fernández, A., Jiménez, E., Raynal, M., Trédan, G.: A timing assumption and two \(t\)-resilient protocols for implementing an eventual leader service in asynchronous shared-memory systems. Algorithmica 56(4), 550–576 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Guerraoui, R., Kapalka, M., Kuznetsov, P.: The weakest failure detectors to boost obstruction-freedom. Distrib. Comput. 20(6), 415–433 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fischer, M.J., Lynch, N.A., Paterson, M.S.: Impossibility of distributed consensus with one faulty process. J. ACM 32(2), 374–382 (1985)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Hélary, J.-M., Hurfin, M., Mostéfaoui, A., Raynal, M., Tronel, F.: Computing global functions in asynchronous distributed systems with perfect failure detectors. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 11(9), 897–909 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lo, W.-K., Hadzilacos, V.: Using failure detectors to solve consensus in asynchronous shared-memory systems. In: Tel, G., Vitányi, P. (eds.) WDAG 1994. LNCS, vol. 857, pp. 280–295. Springer, Heidelberg (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0020440

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Loui, M., Abu-Amara, H.: Memory requirements for agreement among unreliable asynchronous processes. In: Preparata, F.P. (ed.) Advances in Computing Research, vol. 4, pp. 163–183. JAI Press, Greenwich (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lynch, N.A.: Distributed Algorithms, p. 872. Morgan Kaufmann Pub., San Francisco (1996)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Mostéfaoui, A., Raynal, M.: Solving consensus using Chandra-Toueg’s unreliable failure detectors: a general quorum-based approach. In: Jayanti, P. (ed.) DISC 1999. LNCS, vol. 1693, pp. 49–63. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48169-9_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Raynal, M.: Concurrent Programming: Algorithms, Principles, and Foundations, p. 515. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32027-9

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Raynal, M.: Fault-Tolerant Message-Passing Distributed Systems: An Algorithmic Approach, p. 492. Springer, Switzerland (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94141-7

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. Raynal, M., Travers, C.: In search of the holy grail: looking for the weakest failure detector for wait-free set agreement. In: Shvartsman, M.M.A.A. (ed.) OPODIS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4305, pp. 3–19. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11945529_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Taubenfeld, G.: Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming, p. 423. Upper Saddle River, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall (2006)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported by the French ANR project DESCARTES (16-CE40-0023-03) devoted to layered and modular structures in distributed computing. We want to thank the referees for their constructive comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michel Raynal .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Delporte-Gallet, C., Fauconnier, H., Raynal, M. (2019). Participant-Restricted Consensus in Asynchronous Crash-Prone Read/Write Systems and Its Weakest Failure Detector. In: Malyshkin, V. (eds) Parallel Computing Technologies. PaCT 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11657. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25636-4_33

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25636-4_33

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-25635-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-25636-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics