Luan, S. and Gligor, V.D. : "A Fault Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast", IEEE Trans. on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 271 -- 285 (1990).  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....Asymmetric protocols ( 7, 9, 21] use a centralized coordinator for ordering the messages. The problems with this method are in the serial bottleneck they create at the coordinating site, and with the costly handling of faults in case the coordinator crashes. Existing symmetric protocols ([28, 6, 17, 24]) require all machines to relay their up todate view on the latest delivered messages in order for a new message to be admitted into the total order. These methods are essentially all ack, i.e. require all machines to send ack for a single message admittance. Unfortunately, all ack protocols ....

....ordering of messages have been designed that circumvent the impossibility result. Synchronous protocols ( 16, 12, 18] circumvent the impossibility result by explicitly assuming synchrony. Probabilistic protocols ( 4, 29, 8, 10, 13, 26] introduce random steps to the protocol. In other protocols ([9, 7, 6, 24]) the system halts and reconfigures when processors fail or join. In Transis, the impossibility result is circumvented in the automatic maintenance of dynamic membership ( 1] The impossibility result stems from the inability to distinguish between slow and faulty machines in the asynchronous ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

S. W. Luan and V. D. Gligor. A fault-tolerant protocol for atomic broadcast. IEEE Trans. Parallel & Distributed Syst., 1(3):271--285, July 90.

....size contains the data structures necessary to perform the certi cation test (e.g. readset and writeset) Atomic broadcast settings are described in the next section. 6. 2 Atomic Broadcast Implementation The literature on atomic broadcast algorithms is abundant (e.g. 14] 15] 16] 17] [18], 19] 20] and the multitude of di erent models (synchronous, asynchronous, etc. and assumptions about the system renders any fair comparison dicult. However, known atomic broadcast algorithms can be divided into two classes. We say that an Atomic Broadcast algorithm scales well, and belongs ....

S. W. Luan and V. D. Gligor, \A Fault-Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast," IEEE Transactions on Parallel & Distributed Syst., vol. 1, pp. 271-285, July 1990.

.... systems motivated this work, and are described in [2, 8] Atomic broadcast has been traditionally used to achieve fault tolerance by replicating functionality (e.g. using the state machine approach [18] and previous work on atomic broadcast algorithms are in the context of fault tolerance [10, 6, 11, 16, 15, 14, 5, 9, 1]. In these works, one main concern is to guarantee total order and agreement when the broadcaster fails during the broadcast. To obtain this guarantee, a recipient needs to send messages to other recipients, either to inform them of a previously delivered message, or to inform them of the intent ....

.... do not fail or, equivalently, that if they fail then they always recover and can retrieve all previously broadcast messages from stable storage) Deterministic merge algoriths for atomic broadcasts are special cases of symmetric protocols, in which all recipients execute the same code (e.g. [6, 15, 9]) In contrast, asymmetric protocols are usually based on coordinators or tokens (e.g. 5, 1] Broadcasts with weaker and stronger semantics than atomic broadcast have been proposed, such as reliable broadcast and causal broadcast. 12] provides a good overview. The Bellman equation first ....

S. W. Luan and V. D. Gligor. A fault-tolerant protocol for atomic broadcast. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 1(3):271--285, July 1990.

.... recently published well known protocols algorithms on reliable multicast are surveyed in the next two sections, such as Isis and Horus systems of Birman [1, 2] token list [3] and its implementation [4] sequencer [5, 6] two phase [7, 8] tree [9] logical token ring [1, 10, 11] 3 phase [12], discrete acknowledgments [13, 14] and module [2, 15, 16] etc. We classify the well known algorithms as token passing, discrete acknowledgement and two phase approaches and briefly describe their features and associated problems. 1.1. Token passing approach Among the existing multicast ....

Luan, S. and Gligor, V. D. (1990) A fault-tolerant protocol for atomic broadcast. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst., 1, 271--285.

....handling is discussed in Section 7, and Section 8 concludes the paper. 2 Related Work The paper is at the intersection of two domains: 1) Atomic Broadcast algorithms, and (2) optimistic algorithms. The literature on Atomic Broadcast algorithms is abundant (e.g. 1] 3] 4] 5] 7] 10] [13], 15] However, the multitude of di#erent models (synchronous, asynchronous, etc. and as1 Spontaneous total order message reception occurs for example with very high probability when network broadcast or IP multicast are used. 2 sumptions needed to prove the correctness of the algorithms ....

S. W. Luan and V. D. Gligor. A Fault-Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast. IEEE Trans. Parallel & Distributed Syst., 1(3):271--285, July 90.

....In [48] the role of Atomic Broadcast in distributed systems is compared to that of message passing mechanism in the operating systems of today. Horus [50] is the object oriented extension of Isis. The algorithms in [51, 52] are for Atomic Multicast on a point to point network over a spanning tree. [53] uses a 3 phase commit protocol to order messages. Their algorithm uses voting to avoid blocking. The efficiency is low at low loads but increases with increasing load. Amoeba [23] implements a reliable totally ordered multicast, at the kernel level. A sequencer in the group orders messages for ....

V. Gligor and W. Luan, "A fault-tolerant protocol for atomic broadcast," IEEE Trans. Par. Distr. Syst., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 271--285, 1990.

....networks are low ( 10 09 ) entities may fail to receive PDUs due to the buffer overrun because the processing speed of the entities is slower than the transmission speed [1] Schneider et al. 17] present a reliable broadcast protocol which uses the one to one communication. Luan and Gligor [12] present a broadcast protocol which provides the total ordering of received messages based on majority consensus decision. Garcia Molina and Spauster [6] characterize message ordering properties in a reliable broadcast protocol using the one to one network. Takizawa [19, 20] presents a cluster ....

Luan, S. W. and Gligor, V. D., "A Fault-Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast," IEEE Trans. Parallel and Distributed Systems, Vol.1, No.3, 1990, pp.271-285.

....the states of the objects. Here, a group of multiple objects have to be communicated. That is, objects send messages to multiple objects in the group. It is important to support the causally ordered delivery of messages in the distributed applications. Many group communication protocols [1, 3, 4, 6, 10, 11, 13, 16, 18 22, 24, 25, 28 30] have been discussed so far. They have discussed how to support the atomic and ordered delivery of network messages, i.e. packets at the communication level. In order to support the atomic and ordered delivery of messages in the presence of message loss and object faults, O(n 2 ) processing ....

Luan, S. W. and Gligor, V. D., "A Fault-Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast," IEEE Trans. Parallel and Distributed Systems, Vol.1, No.3, 1990, pp.271--285.

....to stable storage is required when (re)entering the prepared state. 7 Related Work Several other proposals have been made for deploying commit protocols as part of a telecommunications service and we give three examples here. 7. 1 Atomic Broadcast Luan and Gligor s atomic broadcast algorithm [9] has each site (end point nodes) accumulating received broadcast messages in a queue. When an application at one of the sites wants to consume a prefix of these messages, it initiates a three phase commit protocol in which the other sites vote according to whether they have received all messages ....

S. Luan and V.D. Gligor. A fault-tolerant protocol for atomic broadcast. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 1(3):271--285, July 1990.

....considered to be only failure in the highspeed network. In this paper, we would like to discuss how to provide atomic delivery of PDUs among multiple entities and some receipt ordering of them by using high speed broadcast networks. Reliable broadcast communication systems have been discussed in [4, 5, 10, 11, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27]. 22] presents a reliable broadcast protocol which uses one to one communication. 5, 10, 13] discuss centralized protocols which use Ethernet. 11] characterizes message ordering properties in a reliable broadcast protocol using the conventional one to one network. 24, 25, 19, 20, 21] present a ....

Luan, S. W. and Gligor, V. D., "A Fault-Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast," IEEE Trans. on Parallel and Distributed Systems, Vol.1, No.3, 1990, pp.271-285.

....The PO protocol [16] provides the LO service. That is, if an entity broadcasts two PDUs p and q in this order, every destination entity receives q after p. In the TO service, all the destinations receive PDUs in the same order in addition to the sending order. Most reliable broadcast protocols [3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 14, 15] provide the TO service. In the CO service, PDUs received are ordered by the happened before relation [8] If p is sent logically before q, p is delivered to every destination before q. In the LO and TO services, it is discussed in what order each entity can receive PDUs. In the CO service, it ....

Luan, S. W. and Gligor, V. D., "A Fault-Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast," IEEE Trans. on Parallel and Distributed Systems, Vol.1, No.3, 1990, pp.271-285.

....needed for both ATC and WKC is (N 1) In these protocols, a message loss in the network is handled by timeout based retransmissions of the message. Other protocols to totally order messages or for atomic message delivery are also possible such as acknowledgements piggybacked on other messages [2, 12, 13] 2 . 3.2 Impact of communication semantics on application level mechanisms The communication requirements of an application have to be mapped onto one of O Bcast, A Bcast and W Bcast semantics. Since ordering of messages is the strongest requirement in applications and it matches exactly with ....

S. W. Luan and V. D. Gligor. A Fault-tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems Vol.1, No.3, pp.271--285, July 1990.

....among multiple objects. Then, messages sent by each object are delivered to the destination objects in the group. This type of group communication is intragroup communication [16, 17, 18, 20] In this paper, we discuss the intra group communication among multiple application objects. The papers [1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 20, 23] have discussed how to support the causally ordered delivery of messages at the network level in the presence of omission faults of the network, i.e. message loss and stop faults of the objects. O(n 2 ) processing overhead and O(n) to O(n 2 ) communication overhead are implied for number n of ....

Luan, S. W. and Gligor, V. D., "A Fault-Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast," IEEE Trans. Parallel and Distributed Systems, Vol.1, No.3, pp. 271-285, 1990.

....the group communication, messages sent by one process have to be delivered to either all the destinations or none in the group, i.e. atomic delivery . In addition, each process has to receive messages sent by the processes in some order. Group communications have been studied in [3, 4] 7] 9] [11, 12], 13] 16] and [17] 21] 17] presents a reliable broadcast protocol which uses the one to one communication. An important problem in the group communication is which process coordinates the cooperation of multiple processes in the group. Most approaches [4, 7, 17] adopt the centralized ....

Luan, S. W. and Gligor, V. D., "A Fault-Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast," IEEE Trans. on Parallel and Distributed Systems, Vol.1, No.3, 1990, pp.271-285.

No context found.

Luan, S. and Gligor, V.D. : "A Fault Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast", IEEE Trans. on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 271 -- 285 (1990).

No context found.

Luan, S. and Gligor, V.D. : A Fault Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast, IEEE Trans. on Parallel and Distributed Systems, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 271 -- 285 (1990).

No context found.

Luan, S. and Gligor, V.D. : A Fault Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast, IEEE Trans. on Parallel and Distributed Systems, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 271 -- 285 (1990).

No context found.

LUAN, S.-W. AND GLIGOR, V. D. 1990. A fault-tolerant protocol for atomic broadcast. IEEE Trans. Parall. Distrib. Syst. 1, 3 (July), 271--285.

No context found.

S. Luan and V. D. Gligor, `A fault-tolerant protocol for atomic broadcast', IEEE Trans. on Parallel and Distributed Syst., 1(3), 271--285 (July 1990).

No context found.

S. W. Luan and V. D. Gligor. A Fault-Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast. IEEE Trans. Parallel & Distributed Syst., 1#3#:271#285, July 90.

No context found.

Luan, S. W. and Gligor, V. D., "A Fault-Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast," IEEE Trans. on Parallel and Distributed Systems , Vol.1, No.3, 1990, pp.271-285.

No context found.

Luan, S. W. and Gligor, V. D., "A Fault-Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast," IEEE Trans. Parallel and Distributed Systems, Vol.1, No.3, 1990, pp.271--285.

No context found.

) Luan, S. W. and Gligor, V. D.: A FaultTolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast, IEEE Trans.Parallel and Distributed Systems, Vol.1, No. 3, pp. 271--285 (1990)

No context found.

Luan, S. W. and Gligor, V. D., "A Fault-Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast," IEEE Trans. on Parallel and Distributed Systems, Vol.1, No.3, 1990, pp.271-285.

No context found.

Luan, S. W. and Gligor, V. D., "A Fault-Tolerant Protocol for Atomic Broadcast," IEEE Trans. on Parallel and Distributed Systems, Vol.1, No.3, 1990, pp.271--285.

First 50 documents  Next 50

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC