Fast Deterministic Consensus in a Noisy Environment

It is well known that the consensus problem cannot be solved deterministically in an asynchronous environment, but that randomized solutions are possible. We propose a new model, called noisy scheduling, in which an adversarial schedule is perturbed randomly, and show that in this model randomness in the environment can substitute for randomness in the algorithm. In particular, we show that a simplified, deterministic version of Chandra's wait-free shared-memory consensus algorithm (PODC, 1996, pp. 166-175) solves consensus in time at most logarithmic in the number of active processes. The proof of termination is based on showing that a race between independent delayed renewal processes produces a winner quickly. In addition, we show that the protocol finishes in constant time using quantum and priority-based scheduling on a uniprocessor, suggesting that it is robust against the choice of model over a wide range.Comment: Typographical errors fixe

Consensus with Max Registers

We consider the problem of implementing randomized wait-free consensus from max registers under the assumption of an oblivious adversary. We show that max registers solve m-valued consensus for arbitrary m in expected O(log^* n) steps per process, beating the Omega(log m/log log m) lower bound for ordinary registers when m is large and the best previously known O(log log n) upper bound when m is small. A simple max-register implementation based on double-collect snapshots translates this result into an O(n log n) expected step implementation of m-valued consensus from n single-writer registers, improving on the best previously-known bound of O(n log^2 n) for single-writer registers

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

Doing-it-All with Bounded Work and Communication

We consider the Do-All problem, where $p$ cooperating processors need to complete $t$ similar and independent tasks in an adversarial setting. Here we deal with a synchronous message passing system with processors that are subject to crash failures. Efficiency of algorithms in this setting is measured in terms of work complexity (also known as total available processor steps) and communication complexity (total number of point-to-point messages). When work and communication are considered to be comparable resources, then the overall efficiency is meaningfully expressed in terms of effort defined as work + communication. We develop and analyze a constructive algorithm that has work $O( t + p \log p\, (\sqrt{p\log p}+\sqrt{t\log t}\, ) )$ and a nonconstructive algorithm that has work $O(t +p \log^2 p)$. The latter result is close to the lower bound $\Omega(t + p \log p/ \log \log p)$ on work. The effort of each of these algorithms is proportional to its work when the number of crashes is bounded above by $c\,p$, for some positive constant $c < 1$. We also present a nonconstructive algorithm that has effort $O(t + p ^{1.77})$

How to Elect a Leader Faster than a Tournament

The problem of electing a leader from among $n$ contenders is one of the fundamental questions in distributed computing. In its simplest formulation, the task is as follows: given $n$ processors, all participants must eventually return a win or lose indication, such that a single contender may win. Despite a considerable amount of work on leader election, the following question is still open: can we elect a leader in an asynchronous fault-prone system faster than just running a $\Theta(\log n)$-time tournament, against a strong adaptive adversary? In this paper, we answer this question in the affirmative, improving on a decades-old upper bound. We introduce two new algorithmic ideas to reduce the time complexity of electing a leader to $O(\log^* n)$, using $O(n^2)$ point-to-point messages. A non-trivial application of our algorithm is a new upper bound for the tight renaming problem, assigning $n$ items to the $n$ participants in expected $O(\log^2 n)$ time and $O(n^2)$ messages. We complement our results with lower bound of $\Omega(n^2)$ messages for solving these two problems, closing the question of their message complexity

Communication-efficient randomized consensus

We consider the problem of consensus in the challenging classic model. In this model, the adversary is adaptive; it can choose which processors crash at any point during the course of the algorithm. Further, communication is via asynchronous message passing: there is no known upper bound on the time to send a message from one processor to another, and all messages and coin flips are seen by the adversary. We describe a new randomized consensus protocol with expected message complexity O(n2log2n) when fewer than n / 2 processes may fail by crashing. This is an almost-linear improvement over the best previously known protocol, and within logarithmic factors of a known Ω(n2) message lower bound. The protocol further ensures that no process sends more than O(nlog3n) messages in expectation, which is again within logarithmic factors of optimal. We also present a generalization of the algorithm to an arbitrary number of failures t, which uses expected O(nt+t2log2t) total messages. Our approach is to build a message-efficient, resilient mechanism for aggregating individual processor votes, implementing the message-passing equivalent of a weak shared coin. Roughly, in our protocol, a processor first announces its votes to small groups, then propagates them to increasingly larger groups as it generates more and more votes. To bound the number of messages that an individual process might have to send or receive, the protocol progressively increases the weight of generated votes. The main technical challenge is bounding the impact of votes that are still “in flight” (generated, but not fully propagated) on the final outcome of the shared coin, especially since such votes might have different weights. We achieve this by leveraging the structure of the algorithm, and a technical argument based on martingale concentration bounds. Overall, we show that it is possible to build an efficient message-passing implementation of a shared coin, and in the process (almost-optimally) solve the classic consensus problem in the asynchronous message-passing model

The Contest Between Simplicity and Efficiency in Asynchronous Byzantine Agreement

In the wake of the decisive impossibility result of Fischer, Lynch, and Paterson for deterministic consensus protocols in the aynchronous model with just one failure, Ben-Or and Bracha demonstrated that the problem could be solved with randomness, even for Byzantine failures. Both protocols are natural and intuitive to verify, and Bracha's achieves optimal resilience. However, the expected running time of these protocols is exponential in general. Recently, Kapron, Kempe, King, Saia, and Sanwalani presented the first efficient Byzantine agreement algorithm in the asynchronous, full information model, running in polylogarithmic time. Their algorithm is Monte Carlo and drastically departs from the simple structure of Ben-Or and Bracha's Las Vegas algorithms. In this paper, we begin an investigation of the question: to what extent is this departure necessary? Might there be a much simpler and intuitive Las Vegas protocol that runs in expected polynomial time? We will show that the exponential running time of Ben-Or and Bracha's algorithms is no mere accident of their specific details, but rather an unavoidable consequence of their general symmetry and round structure. We define a natural class of "fully symmetric round protocols" for solving Byzantine agreement in an asynchronous setting and show that any such protocol can be forced to run in expected exponential time by an adversary in the full information model. We assume the adversary controls $t$ Byzantine processors for $t = cn$, where $c$ is an arbitrary positive constant $< 1/3$. We view our result as a step toward identifying the level of complexity required for a polynomial-time algorithm in this setting, and also as a guide in the search for new efficient algorithms.Comment: 21 page

Lower Bounds for Shared-Memory Leader Election Under Bounded Write Contention

This paper gives tight logarithmic lower bounds on the solo step complexity of leader election in an asynchronous shared-memory model with single-writer multi-reader (SWMR) registers, for both deterministic and randomized obstruction-free algorithms. The approach extends to lower bounds for deterministic and randomized obstruction-free algorithms using multi-writer registers under bounded write concurrency, showing a trade-off between the solo step complexity of a leader election algorithm, and the worst-case number of stalls incurred by a processor in an execution