A constructive proof for FLP

doi:10.1016/j.ipl.2004.06.008

Information Processing Letters

Volume 92, Issue 2, 31 October 2004, Pages 83-87

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipl.2004.06.008 Get rights and content

Abstract

We present a simple elementary proof for the result of Fischer, Lynch, and Paterson (FLP) [J. ACM 32 (2) (April 1985) 374–382] that the consensus problem cannot be solved deterministically in an asynchronous system where a single process may fail by crashing. Our proof is, in contrast to the original, constructive in its crucial lemma, showing not only that a non-terminating execution does exist but also how it can be constructed. Our proof is based on the new notion of non-uniformity of a configuration. Non-uniformity is different from bivalency, which is the central notion in the original proof as well as in proofs of related results.

References (2)

M. Ben-Or
Another advantage of free choice: Completely asynchronous agreement protocols
M.J. Fischer et al.
Impossibility of distributed consensus with one faulty process
J. ACM
(April 1985)

Cited by (5)

Time is not a Healer, but it Sure Makes Hindsight 20:20
2023, arXiv
Mechanical verification of a constructive proof for FLP
2016, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)
A general characterization of indulgence
2008, ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems
Illustrating the impossibility of crash-tolerant consensus in asynchronous systems
2006, Operating Systems Review (ACM)
On conspiracies and hyperfairness in distributed computing
2005, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

View full text

A constructive proof for FLP

Abstract

Another advantage of free choice: Completely asynchronous agreement protocols

Impossibility of distributed consensus with one faulty process

J. ACM