skip to main content
10.1145/780542.780582acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesstocConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

A tight time lower bound for space-optimal implementations of multi-writer snapshots

Published:09 June 2003Publication History

ABSTRACT

A snapshot object consists of a collection of m > 1 components, each capable of storing a value, shared by n processes in an asynchronous shared-memory distributed system. It supports two operations: a process can UPDATE any individual component or atomically SCAN the entire collection to obtain the values of all the components. It is possible to implement a snapshot object using m registers so that each operation takes O(mn) time.In a previous paper, we proved that m registers are necessary to implement a snapshot object with m < n-1 components. Here we prove that, for any such space-optimal implementation, Ω(mn) steps are required to perform a SCAN operation in the worst case, matching the upper bound. We also extend our space and time lower bounds to implementations that use single-writer registers in addition to the multi-writer registers. Specifically, we prove that at least m multi-writer registers are still needed, provided the SCANS do not read a large fraction of the single-writer registers. We also prove that any implementation that uses single-writer registers in addition to $m$ multi-writer registers uses Ω(√mn) steps in the worst case. Our proof yields insight into the structure of any implementation that uses only m multi-writer registers, showing that processes must access the multi-writer registers in a very constrained way.

References

  1. Yehuda Afek, Hagit Attiya, Danny Dolev, Eli Gafni, Michael Merritt, and Nir Shavit. Atomic snapshots of shared memory. Journal of the ACM, 40(4), pages 873--890, September 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Yehuda Afek, Pazi Boxer, and Dan Touitou. Bounds on the shared memory requirements for long-lived and adaptive objects. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pages 81--89, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. James H. Anderson. Composite registers. Distributed Computing, 6(3), pages 141--154, April 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. James H. Anderson. Multi-writer composite registers. Distributed Computing, 7(4), pages 175--195, 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. James H. Anderson and Yong-Jik Kim. An improved lower bound for the time complexity of mutual exclusion. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pages 90--99, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. James H. Anderson and Jae-Heon Yang. Time/contention trade-offs for multiprocessor synchronization. Information and Computation, 124(1), pages 68--84, January 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. James Aspnes. Time- and space-efficient randomized consensus. Journal of Algorithms, 14(3), pages 414--431, May 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. James Aspnes and Maurice Herlihy. Fast, randomized consensus using shared memory. Journal of Algorithms, 11(2), pages 441--461, September 1990. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. James Aspnes and Maurice Herlihy. Wait-free data structures in the asynchronous PRAM model. In Proc. 2nd ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures, pages 340--349, 1990. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Hagit Attiya, Alla Gorbach, and Shlomo Moran. Computing in totally anonymous asynchronous shared memory systems. In Distributed Computing, 12th International Symposium, volume 1499 of LNCS, pages 49--61, 1998. Full version available from www.cs.technion.ac.il/~hagit. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Hagit Attiya, Nancy Lynch, and Nir Shavit. Are wait-free algorithms fast? Journal of the ACM, 41(4), pages 725--763, July 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Hagit Attiya and Ophir Rachman. Atomic snapshots in O(n log n) operations. SIAM Journal on Computing, 27(2), pages 319--340, April 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Hagit Attiya and Jennifer Welch. Distributed Computing: Fundamentals, Simulations and Advanced Topics. McGraw-Hill, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. James Burns and Nancy Lynch. Bounds on shared memory for mutual exclusion. Information and Computation, 107(2), pages 171--184, December 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Panagiota Fatourou, Faith Fich, and Eric Ruppert. Space-optimal multi-writer snapshot objects are slow. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pages 13--20, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Faith Fich, Maurice Herlihy, and Nir Shavit. On the space complexity of randomized synchronization. Journal of the ACM, 45(5), pages 843--862, September 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Faith Fich and Eric Ruppert. Hundreds of impossibility results for distributed computing. Distributed Computing. To appear. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Rainer Gawlick, Nancy Lynch, and Nir Shavit. Concurrent timestamping made simple. In Proceedings of the Israel Symposium on the Theory of Computing and Systems, volume 601 of LNCS, pages 171--183, 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Maurice Herlihy. Randomized wait-free objects. In Proceedings of the 10th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pages 11--21, 1991. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Maurice Herlihy. Wait-free synchronization. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 13(1), pages 124--149, January 1991. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Maurice P. Herlihy and Jeannette M. Wing. Linearizability: A correctness condition for concurrent objects. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 12(3), pages 463--492, July 1990. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Michiko Inoue, Wei Chen, Toshimitsu Masuzawa, and Nobuki Tokura. Linear time snapshots using multi-writer multi-reader registers. In Distributed Algorithms, 8th International Workshop, volume 857 of LNCS, pages 130--140, 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. A. Israeli, A. Shaham, and A. Shirazi. Linear-time snapshot implementations in unbalanced systems. Mathematical Systems Theory, 28(5), pages 469--486, September/October 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Amos Israeli and Asaf Shirazi. The time complexity of updating snapshot memories. Information Processing Letters, 65(1), pages 33--40, January 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Prasad Jayanti, King Tan, and Sam Toueg. Time and space lower bounds for nonblocking implementations. SIAM Journal on Computing, 30(2), pages 438--456, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Nancy A. Lynch. Distributed Algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Shlomo Moran, Gadi Taubenfeld, and Irit Yadin. Concurrent counting. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 53(1), pages 61--78, August 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. A tight time lower bound for space-optimal implementations of multi-writer snapshots

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        STOC '03: Proceedings of the thirty-fifth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
        June 2003
        740 pages
        ISBN:1581136749
        DOI:10.1145/780542

        Copyright © 2003 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 9 June 2003

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • Article

        Acceptance Rates

        STOC '03 Paper Acceptance Rate80of270submissions,30%Overall Acceptance Rate1,469of4,586submissions,32%

        Upcoming Conference

        STOC '24
        56th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC 2024)
        June 24 - 28, 2024
        Vancouver , BC , Canada

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader