Abstract
A liveness contract is an agreement between the specifier of a system and a task to solve, and the programmer who makes her living by delivering protocols. In a shared-memory system, a liveness contract specifies infinite suffixes of executions in which the programmer is required to solve a distributed task. If the behavior of the system does not comply with the specification, no output is required. A convenient way to describe a large class of liveness contracts was recently proposed by Delporte et al. For a system Π of n processes, an adversary is a set \(\mathcal{A}\) of subsets of Π. The system is required to make progress only in executions in which the set of correct processes is in \(\mathcal{A}\).
Given an adversary \(\mathcal{A}\) and a task T, should the programmer sign the contract? Can she deliver?
In this paper, we give a very simple resolution of this question for colorless tasks that contrasts with more involved arguments of the original paper of Delpote et al. More importantly, our resolution is constructive — it tells the programmer how to use \(\mathcal{A}\) to solve T, when it is solvable.
Our framework naturally generalizes to systems enriched with more powerful objects than read-write registers. We determine necessary and sufficient conditions for an adversary \(\mathcal{A}\) to solve consensus using j-process consensus objects and read-write registers, which resolves an open question raised recently by Taubenfeld.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Afek, Y., Attiya, H., Dolev, D., Gafni, E., Merritt, M., Shavit, N.: Atomic snapshots of shared memory. Journal of the ACM 40(4), 873–890 (1993)
Afek, Y., Gafni, E., Rajsbaum, S., Raynal, M., Travers, C.: Simultaneous consensus tasks: A tighter characterization of set-consensus. In: Chaudhuri, S., Das, S.R., Paul, H.S., Tirthapura, S. (eds.) ICDCN 2006. LNCS, vol. 4308, pp. 331–341. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Borowsky, E., Gafni, E.: Generalized FLP impossibility result for t-resilient asynchronous computations. In: STOC, pp. 91–100. ACM Press, New York (May 1993)
Borowsky, E., Gafni, E., Lynch, N.A., Rajsbaum, S.: The BG distributed simulation algorithm. Distributed Computing 14(3), 127–146 (2001)
Chandra, T.D., Hadzilacos, V., Toueg, S.: The weakest failure detector for solving consensus. Journal of the ACM 43(4), 685–722 (1996)
Chandra, T.D., Toueg, S.: Unreliable failure detectors for reliable distributed systems. Journal of the ACM 43(2), 225–267 (1996)
Delporte-Gallet, C., Fauconnier, H., Guerraoui, R., Tielmann, A.: The disagreement power of an adversary. In: Keidar, I. (ed.) DISC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5805, pp. 8–21. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Fich, F.E., Luchangco, V., Moir, M., Shavit, N.: Obstruction-free algorithms can be practically wait-free. In: Fraigniaud, P. (ed.) DISC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3724, pp. 493–494. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Fischer, M.J., Lynch, N.A., Paterson, M.S.: Impossibility of distributed consensus with one faulty process. Journal of the ACM 32(2), 374–382 (1985)
Gafni, E.: Round-by-round fault detectors (extended abstract): Unifying synchrony and asynchrony. In: Proceedings of the 17th Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (1998)
Gafni, E., Guerraoui, R.: Generalizing state machine replication. Technical report, EPFL (2010), http://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/150307
Gafni, E., Koutsoupias, E.: Three-processor tasks are undecidable. SIAM J. Comput. 28(3), 970–983 (1999)
Gafni, E., Kuznetsov, P.: On set consensus numbers. In: Keidar, I. (ed.) DISC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5805, pp. 35–47. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Gafni, E., Kuznetsov, P.: L-resilient adversaries and hitting sets. CoRR, abs/1004.4701 (2010) (to appear in ICDCN 2011), http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.4701
Gafni, E., Rajsbaum, S., Herlihy, M.: Subconsensus tasks: Renaming is weaker than set agreement. In: Dolev, S. (ed.) DISC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4167, pp. 329–338. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Herlihy, M., Rajsbaum, S.: The decidability of distributed decision tasks (extended abstract). In: STOC, pp. 589–598 (1997)
Herlihy, M., Rajsbaum, S.: The topology of shared-memory adversaries. In: PODC (2010)
Imbs, D., Raynal, M., Taubenfeld, G.: On asymmetric progress conditions. In: PODC (2010)
Karp, R.M.: Reducibility among combinatorial problems. Complexity of Computer Computations, 85–103 (1972)
Loui, M.C., Abu-Amara, H.H.: Memory requirements for agreement among unreliable asynchronous processes. Advances in Computing Research 4, 163–183 (1987)
Taubenfeld, G.: The computational structure of progress conditions. In: Lynch, N.A., Shvartsman, A.A. (eds.) DISC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6343, pp. 221–235. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Yang, J., Neiger, G., Gafni, E.: Structured derivations of consensus algorithms for failure detectors. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pp. 297–306 (1998)
Zieliński, P.: Anti-omega: the weakest failure detector for set agreement. In: PODC (August 2008)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Gafni, E., Kuznetsov, P. (2010). Turning Adversaries into Friends: Simplified, Made Constructive, and Extended. In: Lu, C., Masuzawa, T., Mosbah, M. (eds) Principles of Distributed Systems. OPODIS 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6490. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17653-1_28
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17653-1_28
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-17652-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-17653-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)