Update Consistency for Wait-free Concurrent Objects

In large scale systems such as the Internet, replicating data is an essential feature in order to provide availability and fault-tolerance. Attiya and Welch proved that using strong consistency criteria such as atomicity is costly as each operation may need an execution time linear with the latency of the communication network. Weaker consistency criteria like causal consistency and PRAM consistency do not ensure convergence. The different replicas are not guaranteed to converge towards a unique state. Eventual consistency guarantees that all replicas eventually converge when the participants stop updating. However, it fails to fully specify the semantics of the operations on shared objects and requires additional non-intuitive and error-prone distributed specification techniques. This paper introduces and formalizes a new consistency criterion, called update consistency, that requires the state of a replicated object to be consistent with a linearization of all the updates. In other words, whereas atomicity imposes a linearization of all of the operations, this criterion imposes this only on updates. Consequently some read operations may return out-dated values. Update consistency is stronger than eventual consistency, so we can replace eventually consistent objects with update consistent ones in any program. Finally, we prove that update consistency is universal, in the sense that any object can be implemented under this criterion in a distributed system where any number of nodes may crash.Comment: appears in International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium, May 2015, Hyderabad, Indi

A Wait-free Multi-word Atomic (1,N) Register for Large-scale Data Sharing on Multi-core Machines

We present a multi-word atomic (1,N) register for multi-core machines exploiting Read-Modify-Write (RMW) instructions to coordinate the writer and the readers in a wait-free manner. Our proposal, called Anonymous Readers Counting (ARC), enables large-scale data sharing by admitting up to $2^{32}-2$ concurrent readers on off-the-shelf 64-bits machines, as opposed to the most advanced RMW-based approach which is limited to 58 readers. Further, ARC avoids multiple copies of the register content when accessing it---this affects classical register's algorithms based on atomic read/write operations on single words. Thus it allows for higher scalability with respect to the register size. Moreover, ARC explicitly reduces improves performance via a proper limitation of RMW instructions in case of read operations, and by supporting constant time for read operations and amortized constant time for write operations. A proof of correctness of our register algorithm is also provided, together with experimental data for a comparison with literature proposals. Beyond assessing ARC on physical platforms, we carry out as well an experimentation on virtualized infrastructures, which shows the resilience of wait-free synchronization as provided by ARC with respect to CPU-steal times, proper of more modern paradigms such as cloud computing.Comment: non

Reconfigurable Lattice Agreement and Applications

Reconfiguration is one of the central mechanisms in distributed systems. Due to failures and connectivity disruptions, the very set of service replicas (or servers) and their roles in the computation may have to be reconfigured over time. To provide the desired level of consistency and availability to applications running on top of these servers, the clients of the service should be able to reach some form of agreement on the system configuration. We observe that this agreement is naturally captured via a lattice partial order on the system states. We propose an asynchronous implementation of reconfigurable lattice agreement that implies elegant reconfigurable versions of a large class of lattice abstract data types, such as max-registers and conflict detectors, as well as popular distributed programming abstractions, such as atomic snapshot and commit-adopt

On the robustness of Herlihy's hierarchy

A wait-free hierarchy maps object types to levels in Z(+) U (infinity) and has the following property: if a type T is at level N, and T' is an arbitrary type, then there is a wait-free implementation of an object of type T', for N processes, using only registers and objects of type T. The infinite hierarchy defined by Herlihy is an example of a wait-free hierarchy. A wait-free hierarchy is robust if it has the following property: if T is at level N, and S is a finite set of types belonging to levels N - 1 or lower, then there is no wait-free implementation of an object of type T, for N processes, using any number and any combination of objects belonging to the types in S. Robustness implies that there are no clever ways of combining weak shared objects to obtain stronger ones. Contrary to what many researchers believe, we prove that Herlihy's hierarchy is not robust. We then define some natural variants of Herlihy's hierarchy, which are also infinite wait-free hierarchies. With the exception of one, which is still open, these are not robust either. We conclude with the open question of whether non-trivial robust wait-free hierarchies exist

Randomized protocols for asynchronous consensus

The famous Fischer, Lynch, and Paterson impossibility proof shows that it is impossible to solve the consensus problem in a natural model of an asynchronous distributed system if even a single process can fail. Since its publication, two decades of work on fault-tolerant asynchronous consensus algorithms have evaded this impossibility result by using extended models that provide (a) randomization, (b) additional timing assumptions, (c) failure detectors, or (d) stronger synchronization mechanisms than are available in the basic model. Concentrating on the first of these approaches, we illustrate the history and structure of randomized asynchronous consensus protocols by giving detailed descriptions of several such protocols.Comment: 29 pages; survey paper written for PODC 20th anniversary issue of Distributed Computin

A Complexity-Based Hierarchy for Multiprocessor Synchronization

For many years, Herlihy's elegant computability based Consensus Hierarchy has been our best explanation of the relative power of various types of multiprocessor synchronization objects when used in deterministic algorithms. However, key to this hierarchy is treating synchronization instructions as distinct objects, an approach that is far from the real-world, where multiprocessor programs apply synchronization instructions to collections of arbitrary memory locations. We were surprised to realize that, when considering instructions applied to memory locations, the computability based hierarchy collapses. This leaves open the question of how to better capture the power of various synchronization instructions. In this paper, we provide an approach to answering this question. We present a hierarchy of synchronization instructions, classified by their space complexity in solving obstruction-free consensus. Our hierarchy provides a classification of combinations of known instructions that seems to fit with our intuition of how useful some are in practice, while questioning the effectiveness of others. We prove an essentially tight characterization of the power of buffered read and write instructions.Interestingly, we show a similar result for multi-location atomic assignments