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

Atomic Snapshots from Small Registers

Existing n-process implementations of atomic snapshots from registers use large registers. We consider the problem of implementing an m-component snapshot from small, Theta(log(n))-bit registers. A natural solution is to consider simulating the large registers. Doing so straightforwardly can significantly increase the step complexity. We introduce the notion of an interruptible read and show how it can reduce the step complexity of simulating the large registers in the snapshot of Afek et al. In particular, we show how to modify a recent large register simulation to support interruptible reads. Using this modified simulation, the step complexity of UPDATE and SCAN changes from Theta(n*m) to Theta(n*m+m*w), instead of Theta(n*m*w), if each component of the snapshot consists of Theta(w*log(n)) bits. We also show how to modify a limited-use snapshot to use small registers when the number of UPDATE operations is in n^{O(1)}. In this case, we change the step complexity of UPDATE from Theta((log(n))^3) to O(w + (log(n))^2*log(m)) and the step complexity of SCAN from Theta(log(n)) to O(m*w + log(n))

Extension-Based Proofs for Synchronous Message Passing

There is no wait-free algorithm that solves k-set agreement among n ? k+1 processes in asynchronous systems where processes communicate using only registers. However, proofs of this result for k ? 2 are complicated and involve topological reasoning. To explain why such sophisticated arguments are necessary, Alistarh, Aspnes, Ellen, Gelashvili, and Zhu recently introduced extension-based proofs, which generalize valency arguments, and proved that there are no extension-based proofs of this result. In the synchronous message passing model, k-set agreement is solvable, but there is a lower bound of t rounds for any k-set agreement algorithm among n > kt processes when at most k processes can crash each round. The proof of this result for k ? 2 is also a complicated topological argument. We define a notion of extension-based proofs for this model and we show there are no extension-based proofs that t rounds are necessary for any k-set agreement algorithm among n = kt+1 processes, for k ? 2 and t > 2, when at most k processes can crash each round. In particular, our result shows that no valency argument can prove this lower bound

The Step Complexity of Multidimensional Approximate Agreement

Approximate agreement allows a set of n processes to obtain outputs that are within a specified distance ? > 0 of one another and within the convex hull of the inputs. When the inputs are real numbers, there is a wait-free shared-memory approximate agreement algorithm [Moran, 1995] whose step complexity is in O(n log(S/?)), where S, the spread of the inputs, is the maximal distance between inputs. There is another wait-free algorithm [Schenk, 1995] that avoids the dependence on n and achieves O(log(M/?)) step complexity where M, the magnitude of the inputs, is the absolute value of the maximal input. This paper considers whether it is possible to obtain an approximate agreement algorithm whose step complexity depends on neither n nor the magnitude of the inputs, which can be much larger than their spread. On the negative side, we prove that ?(min{(log M)/(log log M), (?log n)/(log log n)}) is a lower bound on the step complexity of approximate agreement, even when the inputs are real numbers. On the positive side, we prove that a polylogarithmic dependence on n and S/? can be achieved, by presenting an approximate agreement algorithm with O(log n (log n + log(S/?))) step complexity. Our algorithm works for multidimensional domains. The step complexity can be further restricted to be in O(min{log n (log n + log (S/?)), log(M/?)}) when the inputs are real numbers

Tight Bounds for Set Disjointness in the Message Passing Model

In a multiparty message-passing model of communication, there are $k$ players. Each player has a private input, and they communicate by sending messages to one another over private channels. While this model has been used extensively in distributed computing and in multiparty computation, lower bounds on communication complexity in this model and related models have been somewhat scarce. In recent work \cite{phillips12,woodruff12,woodruff13}, strong lower bounds of the form $\Omega(n \cdot k)$ were obtained for several functions in the message-passing model; however, a lower bound on the classical Set Disjointness problem remained elusive. In this paper, we prove tight lower bounds of the form $\Omega(n \cdot k)$ for the Set Disjointness problem in the message passing model. Our bounds are obtained by developing information complexity tools in the message-passing model, and then proving an information complexity lower bound for Set Disjointness. As a corollary, we show a tight lower bound for the task allocation problem \cite{DruckerKuhnOshman} via a reduction from Set Disjointness

Why Extension-Based Proofs Fail

We introduce extension-based proofs, a class of impossibility proofs that includes valency arguments. They are modelled as an interaction between a prover and a protocol. Using proofs based on combinatorial topology, it has been shown that it is impossible to deterministically solve k-set agreement among n > k > 1 processes in a wait-free manner in certain asynchronous models. However, it was unknown whether proofs based on simpler techniques were possible. We show that this impossibility result cannot be obtained for one of these models by an extension-based proof and, hence, extension-based proofs are limited in power.Comment: This version of the paper is for the NIS model. Previous versions of the paper are for the NIIS mode