Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Fault tolerance bounds for memory consistency

  • Contributed Papers
  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Distributed Algorithms (WDAG 1997)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1320))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 256 Accesses

Abstract

We analyze the achievable fault tolerances of shared memory consistency conditions in the form of t-resilience, the ability to withstand up to t node failures. We derive tight bounds for linearizability, sequential consistency, processor consistency, and some weaker memories in totally asynchronous systems, in which failed and slow nodes cannot be distinguished. For linearizability, we show that neither the read nor the write operation can tolerate more failures than a minority of the nodes. For sequential consistency, processor consistency, and related conditions, we show that one operation can be wait-free and the other cannot tolerate more failures than a minority of the nodes. Several weaker conditions can have both operations wait-free.

This work was supported in part by NSF grants CCR92-21657 and CCR95-05807.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Agrawal, D., Choy, M., Leong, H. V., and Singh, A. K. Mixed consistency: A model for parallel programming. In PODC '94 (Los Angeles, CA, USA, 14–17 Aug. 1994), pp. 101–10.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ahamad, M., Neiger, G., Burns, J. E., Kohli, P., and Hutto, P. W. Causal memory: Definitions, implementation and programming. Distributed Computing 9, 1 (Aug. 1995), 37–49.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Attiya, H. Efficient and robust sharing of memory in message-passing systems. In WDAG '96 (Bologna, Italy, 9–11 Oct. 1996), Ö. Babaoglu and K. Marzullo, Eds., vol. 1151 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, pp. 56–70.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Attiya, H., Bar-Noy, A., and Dolev, D. Sharing memory robustly in message-passing systems. J. ACM 42, 1 (Jan. 1995), 124–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Attiya, H., and Welch, J. L. Sequential consistency versus linearizability. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 12, 2 (May 1994), 91–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Borowsky, E., and Gafni, E. Generalized FLP impossibility result for t-resilient asynchronous computations (extended abstract). In STOC '93 (San Diego, CA, USA, 16–18 May 1993), pp. 91–100.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Chandra, T., Hadzilacos, V., Jayanti, P., and Toueg, S. Wait-freedom vs. t-resiliency and the robustness of wait-free hierarchies. In PODC '94 (Los Angeles, CA, USA, 14–17 Aug. 1994), pp. 334–43.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chandra, T. D., and Toueg, S. Unreliable failure detectors for reliable distributed systems. J. ACM 43, 2 (Mar. 1996), 225–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cristian, F. Reaching agreement on processor group membership in synchronous distributed systems. Distributed Computing 4, 4 (Apr. 1991), 175–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dolev, D., Dwork, C., and Stockmeyer, L. On the minimal synchronism needed for distributed consensus. J. ACM 34, 1 (Jan. 1987), 77–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Friedman, R. Implementing hybrid consistency with high-level synchronization operations. Distributed Computing 9, 3 (Dec. 1995), 119–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gharachorloo, K., Lenoski, D., Laudon, J., Gibbons, P., Gupta, A., and Hennessy, J. Memory consistency and event ordering in scalable shared-memory multiprocessors. In ISCA '90 (Seattle, WA, USA, 28–31 May 1990), pp. 15–26. Revised in Stanford CSL Technical Report 93-568.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Goodman, J. R. Cache consistency and sequential consistency. Tech. Rep. 1006, Computer Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Feb. 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Herlihy, M. P. Wait-free synchronization. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 13, 1 (Jan. 1991), 124–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Herlihy, M. P., and Shavit, N. The asynchronous computability theorem for t-resilient tasks. In STOC '93 (San Diego, CA, USA, 16–18 May 1993), pp. 111–20.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Herlihy, M. P., and Wing, J. M. Linearizability: A correctness condition for concurrent objects. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 12, 3 (July 1990), 463–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kosa, M. J. Making operations of concurrent data types fast. In PODC '94 (Los Angeles, CA, USA, 14–17 Aug. 1994), pp. 32–41.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lamport, L. How to make a multiprocessor computer that correctly executes multiprocess programs. IEEE Trans. Comput. 28, 9 (Sept. 1979), 690–1.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lamport, L. On interprocess communication, parts I and II. Distributed Computing 1, 2 (Apr. 1986), 77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lencevicius, R., and Singh, A. K. Latency bounds for memory consistency. Submitted for publication, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Li, K., and Hudak, P. Memory coherence in shared virtual memory systems. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 7, 4 (Nov. 1989), 321–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Li, M., Tromp, J., and Vitanyi, P. M. B. How to share concurrent wait-free variables. J. ACM 43, 4 (July 1996), 723–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Lipton, R. J., and Sandberg, J. S. PRAM: A scalable shared memory. Tech. Rep. CS-TR-180-88, Department of Computer Science, Princeton University, Sept. 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lo, W.-K. More on t-resilience vs. wait-freedom. In PODC '95 (Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 20–23 Aug. 1995), pp. 110-19.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Malki, D., Birman, K., Ricciardi, A., and Schiper, A. Uniform actions in asynchronous distributed systems. In PODC '94 (Los Angeles, CA, USA, 14–17 Aug. 1994), pp. 274–283.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Mavronicolas, M., and Roth, D. Efficient, strongly consistent implementations of shared memory (extended abstract). In WDAG '92 (Haifa, Israel, 2–4 Nov. 1992), A. Segall and S. Zaks, Eds., vol. 647 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, pp. 346-61.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of California, Santa Barbara, USA

    Jerry James & Ambuj K. Singh

Authors
  1. Jerry James
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ambuj K. Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Marios Mavronicolas Philippas Tsigas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

James, J., Singh, A.K. (1997). Fault tolerance bounds for memory consistency. In: Mavronicolas, M., Tsigas, P. (eds) Distributed Algorithms. WDAG 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1320. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0030685

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0030685

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-63575-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69600-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation