Another advantage of free choice (Extended Abstract): Completely asynchronous agreement protocols

@inproceedings{BenOr1983AnotherAO,
  title={Another advantage of free choice (Extended Abstract): Completely asynchronous agreement protocols},
  author={Michael Ben-Or},
  booktitle={PODC '83},
  year={1983}
}
  • M. Ben-Or
  • Published in PODC '83 17 August 1983
  • Mathematics
Recently, Fischer, Lynch and Paterson [3] proved that no completely asynchronous consensus protocol can tolerate even a single unannounced process death. We exhibit here a probabilistic solution for this problem, which guarantees that as long as a majority of the processes continues to operate, a decision will be made (Theorem 1). Our solution is completely asynchronous and is rather strong: As in [4], it is guaranteed to work with probability 1 even against an adversary scheduler who knows all… 
Randomized protocols for asynchronous consensus
  • J. Aspnes
  • Computer Science, Mathematics
    Distributed Computing
  • 2003
TLDR
This work illustrates the history and structure of randomized asynchronous consensus protocols by giving detailed descriptions of several such protocols.
On the minimal synchronism needed for distributed consensus
TLDR
The proofs expose general heuristic principles that explain why consensus is possible in certain models but not possible in others, and several critical system parameters, including various synchronicity conditions, are identified.
The best of both worlds: A hybrid approach to solve consensus
TLDR
A simple binary consensus protocol that combines failure detection and randomization is proposed that terminates deterministically when the failure detection mechanism works correctly; it terminates with probability 1, otherwise.
A Simple Predicate to Expedite the Termination of a Randomized Consensus Algorithm
  • M. Raynal
  • Computer Science
    2015 IEEE 29th International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications
  • 2015
TLDR
This paper considers such a consensus algorithm and presents a simple predicate that allows to expedite its termination and designs a randomized algorithm to circumvent this impossibility.
Randomized Agreement Protocols
  • M. Ben-Or
  • Mathematics
    Fault-Tolerant Distributed Computing
  • 1986
Reaching agreement in the presence of faults is one of the most important problems in fault-tolerant distributed computation, and it is also a beautiful example of the power of randomized algorithms.
Safe Permissionless Consensus
TLDR
Sandglass is presented, the first permissionless consensus algorithm that guarantees deterministic agreement and termination with probability 1 under general omission failures, and adopts a hybrid synchronous communication model.
Simple constant-time consensus protocols in realistic failure models
TLDR
Using simple protocols, it is shown how to achieve consensus in constant expected time, within a variety of fail-stop and omission failure models, which are based on distributively flipping a coin.
Randomized multivalued consensus
TLDR
A new randomized consensus protocol that allows processes to propose arbitrary values and relies on a relatively simple combination of randomization and reliable broadcast.
A generic framework for indulgent consensus
  • R. Guerraoui, M. Raynal
  • Computer Science, Mathematics
    23rd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, 2003. Proceedings.
  • 2003
TLDR
This generic framework provides indulgent consensus protocols that are particularly simple and efficient both in well-behaved runs and in stable runs, and in those runs, the protocols terminate in two communication steps (which is optimal).
...
...

References

SHOWING 1-6 OF 6 REFERENCES
On the advantages of free choice: a symmetric and fully distributed solution to the dining philosophers problem
TLDR
The solution proposed here is fully distributed and does not involve any central memory or any process with which every philosopher can communicate.
Impossibility of distributed consensus with one faulty process
TLDR
It is shown that every protocol for this problem has the possibility of nontermination, even with only one faulty process, in the asynchronous consensus problem.
Polynomial algorithms for multiple processor agreement
TLDR
It is proved that no matter what kind of information is exchanged, there is no way to reach agreement with fewer than t+1 rounds of exchange, where t is the upper bound on the number of faults.
A Lower Bound for the Time to Assure Interactive Consistency
Polynomial Algorithms for Byzantine Agreement
  • Proc
ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing
  • ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing
  • 1982