A Generic Group Communication Approach for Hybrid Distributed Systems

  • Raimundo José de Araújo Macêdo
  • Allan Edgard Silva Freitas
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5523)


Group Communication is a powerful abstraction that is being widely used to manage consistency problems in a variety of distributed system models, ranging from synchronous, to time-free asynchronous model. Though similar in principles, distinct implementation mechanisms have been employed in the design of group communication for distinct system models. However, the hybrid nature of many modern distributed systems, with dynamic and varied QoS guarantees, has put forward the need for integrated models. Furthermore, adaptation with degraded service is a common requirement in such scenarios. This paper tackles this new challenge by introducing a generic group communication mechanism. Because of its integrated feature, our approach is capable of handling group communication for both synchronous and asynchronous distributed systems, dynamically adapting to the available QoS. For example, it can dynamically switch to the asynchronous version when the run-time system can no longer guarantee a timely operation. The properties and algorithms of the integrated approach are presented in this paper, as well as a performance evaluation through simulation, comparing this mechanism with some classical approaches.


Group Communication Delivery Delay Message Delivery Asynchronous System Application Message 
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.


  1. 1.
    Birman, K.P.: The process group approach to reliable distributed computing. Communications of the ACM 36(12), 37–53 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cristian, F.: Synchronous and asynchronous group communication. Communications of the ACM 39(4), 88–97 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chandra, T.D., Hadzilacos, V., Toueg, S., Charron-Bost, B.: On the impossibility of group membership. In: Proc. of the 15th annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pp. 322–330. ACM Press, New York (1996)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chockler, G.V., Keidar, I., Vitenberg, R.: Group communication specifications: a comprehensive study. ACM Computing Surveys 33(4), 427–469 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Défago, X., Schiper, A., Urbán, P.: Total order broadcast and multicast algorithms: Taxonomy and survey. ACM Computing Surveys 36(4), 372–421 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cristian, F., Aghili, H., Strong, R., Volev, D.: Atomic Broadcast: from simple message diffusion to byzantine agreement. In: Proc. of the 25th International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing. IEEE CS Press, Los Alamitos (1995)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kopetz, H., Grunsteidl, G.: Ttp - a protocol for fault-tolerant real-time systems. IEEE Computer 27(1), 14–23 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cristian, F.: Reaching agreement on processor-group membership in synchronous distributed systems. Distributed Computing (4), 175–187 (1991)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fisher, M.J., Lynch, N., Paterson, M.S.: Impossibility of distributed consensus with one faulty process. Journal of the ACM 32(2), 374–382 (1985)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chandra, T.D., Toueg, S.: Unreliable failure detectors for reliable distributed systems. Journal of the ACM 43(2), 225–267 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dolev, D., Dwork, C., Stockmeyer, L.: On the minimal synchronism needed for distributed consensus. Journal of the ACM 34(1), 77–97 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Veríssimo, P., Casimiro, A.: The timely computing base model and architecture. IEEE Trans. on Computers 51(8), 916–930 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hiltunen, M.A., Schlichting, R.D., Han, X., Cardozo, M.M., Das, R.: Real-time dependable channels: Customizing qos attributes for distributed systems. IEEE Trans. on Parallel and Distributed Systems 10(6), 600–612 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aurrecoechea, C., Campbell, A.T., Hauw, L.: A survey of qos architectures. ACM Multimedia Systems Journal 6(3), 138–151 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gorender, S., Macêdo, R.J.A., Raynal, M.: An adaptive programming model for fault-tolerant distributed computing. IEEE Trans. on Dependable and Secure Computing 4, 18–31 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Macêdo, R., Gorender, S.: Perfect failure detection in the partitioned synchronous distributed system model. In: Proc. of the The 4th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security (ARES 2009), pp. 273–280. IEEE CS Press, Los Alamitos (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Macêdo, R.J.A.: Fault-tolerant group communication protocols for asynchronous systems. In: Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computing Science, U. of Newcastle upon Tyne (1994)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Macêdo, R.J.A., Ezhilchelvan, P., Shrivastava, S.K.: Flow control schemes for fault tolerant multicast protocols. In: Proc. of the IEEE Pacific Rim International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Systems (PRFTS 1995) (1995)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ezhilchelvan, P., Macêdo, R.J.A., Shrivastava, S.: Newtop: a fault-tolerant group communication protocol. In: Proc. of the 15th IEEE Int. Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS 1995), pp. 296–306 (1995)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schneider, F.B.: Implementing fault-tolerant services using the state machine approach: a tutorial. ACM Computing Surveys 22(4), 299–319 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lamport, L.: Time, clocks, and the ordering of events in a distributed system. Communications of ACM 21(7), 558–565 (1978)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Macêdo, R.J.A.: Adaptive and dependable group communication. Technical Report 001/2008, Distributed Systems Laboratory (LaSiD) - Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Brazil (December 2008)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cristian, F., Center, I., San Jose, C.: Agreeing on who is present and who is absent in a synchronousdistributed system. In: Digest of Papers of the 18th International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing (FTCS-18), pp. 206–211. IEEE CS Press, Los Alamitos (1988)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lundelius, J., Lynch, N.: Upper and lower bound for clock synchronization. Information and Control 62(2), 190–204 (1984)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lehoczky, J.P., Sha, L., Strosnider, J.: Enhanced aperiodic responsiveness in hard real-time environment. In: Proc. of the 8th IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium (RTSS 1987), San Jose, California, pp. 110–123. IEEE CS Press, Los Alamitos (1987)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Blake, S., Black, D., Carlson, M., Davies, E., Wang, Z., Weiss, W.: An architecture for differentiated services. RFC 2475 (December 1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raimundo José de Araújo Macêdo
    • 1
  • Allan Edgard Silva Freitas
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Distributed Systems Laboratory (LaSiD) Computer Science DepartmentFederal University of BahiaSalvadorBrazil
  2. 2.Federal Institute of BahiaSalvadorBrazil

Personalised recommendations