[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
article

Wait-Free Consensus Using Asynchronous Hardware

Published: 01 August 1994 Publication History

Abstract

This paper studies the wait-free consensus problem in the asynchronous shared memory model. In this model, processors communicate by shared registers that allow atomic read and write operations (but do not support atomic test-and-set). It is known that the wait-free consensus problem cannot be solved by deterministic protocols. A randomized solution is presented. This protocol is simple, constructive, tolerates up to $n-1$ processors crashes (where $n$ is the number of processors), and its expected run-time is $O(n^2)$.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Reviews

Martti J. Tienari

Reaching consensus among different processors is one of the fundamental problems whenever any type of cooperation is to be achieved. In this paper, the problem is investigated in a totally asynchronous system, where communication is carried out by shared registers that are atomic with respect to read and write operations, and up to n-1 out of n processors may fail-stop (that is, crash). The authors look for solutions that satisfy the wait-free termination requirement. This means that every processor that is activated a sufficient number of times will decide and terminate. Such a requirement is in accordance with the complete asynchrony of the system: it does not make sense to force a fast processor to wait until a slow processor makes a move. Furthermore, wait-free termination implies resilience to any number of processor crashes. It is known that wait-free consensus cannot be achieved by deterministic protocols, even for systems with two processors. It is also a well-known fact that certain problems that cannot be solved by deterministic protocols admit randomized solutions. The authors present an efficient randomized protocol that operates with atomic single-writer multireader registers. The protocol is fairly simple and its expected runtime is O n 2 for systems of size n . This means that, for any adversary scheduler, the system reaches a decision, on average, after O n 2 steps by all processors. The protocol uses unbounded-size registers. Large values are actually written only with very low probability; for example, when the size of the shared registers is bounded by 128 bits per processor, the protocol still never errs and has a probability of nontermination of less than 2 -56 . The paper is clearly written. It is for specialists, and makes progress in a limited area of research.

Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image SIAM Journal on Computing
SIAM Journal on Computing  Volume 23, Issue 4
Aug. 1994
225 pages
ISSN:0097-5397
  • Editor:
  • Z. Galil
Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 August 1994

Author Tags

  1. asynchronous distributed systems
  2. consensus
  3. fault tolerance
  4. randomized algorithms
  5. wait-free protocols

Qualifiers

  • Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 04 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)The Space Complexity of Consensus from SwapJournal of the ACM10.1145/363139071:1(1-26)Online publication date: 11-Feb-2024
  • (2022)Fast and Fair Randomized Wait-Free LocksProceedings of the 2022 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing10.1145/3519270.3538448(187-197)Online publication date: 20-Jul-2022
  • (2022)The Space Complexity of Consensus from SwapProceedings of the 2022 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing10.1145/3519270.3538420(176-186)Online publication date: 20-Jul-2022
  • (2016)Brief AnnouncementProceedings of the 2016 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing10.1145/2933057.2933078(147-149)Online publication date: 25-Jul-2016
  • (2016)A tight space bound for consensusProceedings of the forty-eighth annual ACM symposium on Theory of Computing10.1145/2897518.2897565(345-350)Online publication date: 19-Jun-2016
  • (2015)Faster randomized consensus with an oblivious adversaryDistributed Computing10.1007/s00446-013-0195-y28:1(21-29)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2015
  • (2014)Tight Bounds for Adopt-Commit ObjectsTheory of Computing Systems10.1007/s00224-013-9448-155:3(451-474)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2014
  • (2012)Faster randomized consensus with an oblivious adversaryProceedings of the 2012 ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing10.1145/2332432.2332434(1-8)Online publication date: 16-Jul-2012
  • (2011)Randomized consensus in expected O(n2) total work using single-writer registersProceedings of the 25th international conference on Distributed computing10.5555/2075029.2075077(363-373)Online publication date: 20-Sep-2011
  • (2011)Tight bounds for anonymous adopt-commit objectsProceedings of the twenty-third annual ACM symposium on Parallelism in algorithms and architectures10.1145/1989493.1989548(317-324)Online publication date: 4-Jun-2011
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media