The inherent price of indulgence

An indulgent algorithm is a distributed algorithm that tolerates asynchronous periods of the network when process crash detection is unreliable. This paper presents a tight bound on the time complexity of indulgent consensus algorithms.We consider a round-based eventually synchronous model, and we show that any t-resilient consensus algorithm in this model, requires at least t+2 rounds for a global decision even in runs that are synchronous. We contrast our lower bound with the well-known t+1 round tight bound on consensus in the synchronous model. We then prove the bound to be tight by exhibiting a new t-resilient consensus algorithm in the eventually synchronous model that reaches a global decision at round t+2 in every synchronous run. Our new algorithm is in this sense significantly faster than the most efficient indulgent algorithm we know of, which requires 2t+2 rounds in synchronous runs.Our lower bound applies to round-based consensus algorithms with unreliable failure detectors such as ⋄ P and ⋄ S, and our matching algorithm can be adapted to such failure detectors.

[1]  Rachid Guerraoui,et al.  Tight Bounds on Early Local Decisions in Uniform Consensus , 2003, DISC.

[2]  Eli Gafni,et al.  Round-by-round fault detectors (extended abstract): unifying synchrony and asynchrony , 1998, PODC '98.

[3]  Rachid Guerraoui,et al.  Synchronous system and perfect failure detector: Solvability and efficiency issues , 2000, Proceeding International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks. DSN 2000.

[4]  Nancy A. Lynch,et al.  Impossibility of distributed consensus with one faulty process , 1985, JACM.

[5]  Sam Toueg,et al.  Unreliable failure detectors for reliable distributed systems , 1996, JACM.

[6]  André Schiper,et al.  Uniform consensus is harder than consensus , 2004, J. Algorithms.

[7]  Idit Keidar,et al.  On the cost of fault-tolerant consensus when there are no faults: preliminary version , 2001, SIGA.

[8]  Nancy A. Lynch,et al.  Consensus in the presence of partial synchrony , 1988, JACM.

[9]  Leslie Lamport,et al.  The Byzantine Generals Problem , 1982, TOPL.

[10]  Marcos K. Aguilera,et al.  A Simple Bivalency Proof that t-Resilient Consensus Requires t + 1 Rounds , 1998, Inf. Process. Lett..

[11]  Idit Keidar,et al.  A simple proof of the uniform consensus synchronous lower bound , 2003, Inf. Process. Lett..

[12]  Michel Raynal,et al.  A simple and fast asynchronous consensus protocol based on a weak failure detector , 1999, Distributed Computing.

[13]  Seif Haridi,et al.  Distributed Algorithms , 1992, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[14]  Achour Mostéfaoui,et al.  Leader-Based Consensus , 2001, Parallel Process. Lett..

[15]  Eli Gafni,et al.  Round-by-Round Fault Detectors: Unifying Synchrony and Asynchrony (Extended Abstract). , 1998, PODC 1998.

[16]  Rachid Guerraoui,et al.  Indulgent algorithms (preliminary version) , 2000, PODC '00.

[17]  Idit Keidar,et al.  On the Cost of Fault-Tolerant Consensus When There Are No Faults - A Tutorial , 2003, LADC.