Distributed Computing 3. Leader Election – lower bound for ring networks Shmuel Zaks ©

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
THE WELL ORDERING PROPERTY Definition: Let B be a set of integers. An integer m is called a least element of B if m is an element of B, and for every x.
Advertisements

Distributed Computing 9. Sorting - a lower bound on bit complexity Shmuel Zaks ©
Distributed Leader Election Algorithms in Synchronous Ring Networks
Lecture 8: Asynchronous Network Algorithms
Distributed Computing 1. Lower bound for leader election on a complete graph Shmuel Zaks ©
Routing in a Parallel Computer. A network of processors is represented by graph G=(V,E), where |V| = N. Each processor has unique ID between 1 and N.
Chapter 15 Basic Asynchronous Network Algorithms
Leader Election Let G = (V,E) define the network topology. Each process i has a variable L(i) that defines the leader.  i,j  V  i,j are non-faulty.
Distributed Computing 2. Leader Election – ring network Shmuel Zaks ©
Gossip and its application Presented by Anna Kaplun.
Distributed Computing 8. Impossibility of consensus Shmuel Zaks ©
Lecture 7: Synchronous Network Algorithms
Distributed Computing 5. Snapshot Shmuel Zaks ©
Distributed Computing 8. Impossibility of consensus Shmuel Zaks ©
LOCALITY IN DISTRIBUTED GRAPH ALGORITHMS Nathan Linial Presented by: Ron Ryvchin.
CPSC 668Set 10: Consensus with Byzantine Failures1 CPSC 668 Distributed Algorithms and Systems Fall 2009 Prof. Jennifer Welch.
CPSC 668Set 5: Synchronous LE in Rings1 CPSC 668 Distributed Algorithms and Systems Spring 2008 Prof. Jennifer Welch.
1 Complexity of Network Synchronization Raeda Naamnieh.
CPSC 668Set 4: Asynchronous Lower Bound for LE in Rings1 CPSC 668 Distributed Algorithms and Systems Fall 2009 Prof. Jennifer Welch.
CPSC 668Set 3: Leader Election in Rings1 CPSC 668 Distributed Algorithms and Systems Spring 2008 Prof. Jennifer Welch.
CPSC 668Set 16: Distributed Shared Memory1 CPSC 668 Distributed Algorithms and Systems Fall 2006 Prof. Jennifer Welch.
2002/04/18Chin-Kai Wu, CS, NTHU1 Jitter Control in QoS Network Yishay Mansour and Boaz Patt-Shamir IEEE/ACM TRANSACTIONS ON NETWORKING, VOL. 9, NO. 4,
CPSC 668Set 10: Consensus with Byzantine Failures1 CPSC 668 Distributed Algorithms and Systems Fall 2006 Prof. Jennifer Welch.
Parallel Routing Bruce, Chiu-Wing Sham. Overview Background Routing in parallel computers Routing in hypercube network –Bit-fixing routing algorithm –Randomized.
1 Fault-Tolerant Consensus. 2 Failures in Distributed Systems Link failure: A link fails and remains inactive; the network may get partitioned Crash:
A (nlog(n)) lower bound for leader election in a clique.
Bit Complexity of Breaking and Achieving Symmetry in Chains and Rings.
Dept. of Computer Science Distributed Computing Group Asymptotically Optimal Mobile Ad-Hoc Routing Fabian Kuhn Roger Wattenhofer Aaron Zollinger.
1 Brief Announcement: Distributed Broadcasting and Mapping Protocols in Directed Anonymous Networks Michael Langberg: Open University of Israel Moshe Schwartz:
Distributed Algorithms (22903) Lecturer: Danny Hendler Leader election in rings This presentation is based on the book “Distributed Computing” by Hagit.
Systems of Distributed systems Module 2 - Distributed algorithms Teaching unit 2 – Properties of distributed algorithms Ernesto Damiani University of Bozen.
Message Passing Systems A Formal Model. The System Topology – network (connected undirected graph) Processors (nodes) Communication channels (edges) Algorithm.
Interval Routing Presented by: Marc Segal. Motivation(1) In a computer network a routing method is required so that nodes can communicate with each other.
Message Passing Systems A Formal Model. The System Topology – network (connected undirected graph) Processors (nodes) Communication channels (edges) Algorithm.
Distributed Computing 5. Snapshot Shmuel Zaks ©
Distributed Computing 5. Synchronization Shmuel Zaks ©
Selected topics in distributed computing Shmuel Zaks
Lecture #12 Distributed Algorithms (I) CS492 Special Topics in Computer Science: Distributed Algorithms and Systems.
Andrew’s Leap 2011 Pancakes With A Problem Steven Rudich.
Computer Science and Engineering Parallel and Distributed Processing CSE 8380 February 10, 2005 Session 9.
By J. Burns and J. Pachl Based on a presentation by Irina Shapira and Julia Mosin Uniform Self-Stabilization 1 P0P0 P1P1 P2P2 P3P3 P4P4 P5P5.
1 Leader Election in Rings. 2 A Ring Network Sense of direction left right.
Chapter 5: Permutation Groups  Definitions and Notations  Cycle Notation  Properties of Permutations.
Leader Election. Leader Election: the idea We study Leader Election in rings.
CSCE 668 DISTRIBUTED ALGORITHMS AND SYSTEMS Fall 2011 Prof. Jennifer Welch CSCE 668 Set 5: Synchronous LE in Rings 1.
Computer Science and Engineering Parallel and Distributed Processing CSE 8380 March 03, 2005 Session 15.
Lecture #14 Distributed Algorithms (II) CS492 Special Topics in Computer Science: Distributed Algorithms and Systems.
Multiprocess Synchronization Algorithms ( ) Lecturer: Danny Hendler Global Computation.
CS Lecture 14 Powerful Tools     !. Build your toolbox of abstract structures and concepts. Know the capacities and limits of each tool.
1 Review Questions Define n variables, types of shared variables, message-passing, shared-memory system, system topology n program-counter/guarded command.
CSCE 668 DISTRIBUTED ALGORITHMS AND SYSTEMS Spring 2014 Prof. Jennifer Welch CSCE 668 Set 3: Leader Election in Rings 1.
CSCE 668 DISTRIBUTED ALGORITHMS AND SYSTEMS Fall 2011 Prof. Jennifer Welch CSCE 668 Set 16: Distributed Shared Memory 1.
Fault tolerance and related issues in distributed computing Shmuel Zaks GSSI - Feb
Fault tolerance and related issues in distributed computing Shmuel Zaks GSSI - Feb
Fault tolerance and related issues in distributed computing Shmuel Zaks GSSI - Feb
Fault tolerance and related issues in distributed computing Shmuel Zaks GSSI - Feb
Fault tolerance and related issues in distributed computing Shmuel Zaks GSSI - Feb
Distributed Algorithms (22903) Lecturer: Danny Hendler Leader election in rings This presentation is based on the book “Distributed Computing” by Hagit.
By J. Burns and J. Pachl Presented by: Irina Shapira Julia Mosin February1999 February 1999 Uniform Self-Stabilization.
2016/6/23Election Algorithms1 Introduction to Distributed Algorithm Part Two: Fundamental Algorithm Chapter 7- Election Algorithms Teacher: Chun-Yuan Lin.
Distributed systems II Closing
CSCE 668 DISTRIBUTED ALGORITHMS AND SYSTEMS
Michael Langberg: Open University of Israel
Great Theoretical Ideas In Computer Science
Lecture 9: Asynchronous Network Algorithms
Parallel and Distributed Algorithms
Distributed Algorithms (22903)
CSCE 668 DISTRIBUTED ALGORITHMS AND SYSTEMS
Presented by Jiossy Rami
Locality In Distributed Graph Algorithms
Presentation transcript:

Distributed Computing 3. Leader Election – lower bound for ring networks Shmuel Zaks ©

Theorem: For every algorithm A for maximum finding in unidirectional rings, and every set I of n identities, PKR

Unidirectional ring Same messages in every execution

ring (4, 1, 3, 5 ) (1, 3, 5, 4 ) (3, 5, 4, 1 ) (5, 4, 1, 3 )

messages (4 ) (4,1 ) (4, 1, 3 )

Sequence Prefix of a sequence Concatenation of sequences subsequence of if s.t. C(S) = all cyclic permutations of S |C(s)| = length (s)

{ (4, 1, 3, 5 ), (1, 3, 5, 4 ), (3, 5, 4, 1 ), (5, 4, 1, 3 ) } s = (4, 1, 3, 5 ) C(s) = length (s) = 4 (4,1,3) is a prefix of s (1,3) is a subsequence of s

In every execution of a maximum finding algorithm A, at least one processor must see its own value In a ring labeled s, at least one message in C(s) is sent by A (4 ) (4,1 ) (4,1,3 ) (4,1,3,5 )

– set of all finite sequences of distinct integers For

E does not have to be a finite set. Note: though we wrote Why?

s = (4, 1, 3, 5 ) E={(4,5),(3,5),(5,4,1),(3),(6,2),(5,4) } N(s,E) = 4 N 1 (s,E) = 1 N 2 (s,E) = 2 N 3 (s,E) = 1 N k (s,E) = 0 for k ≥ 4

Definition: A setis exhaustive if it has the following two properties:  Prefix property: if then for every prefix s of u.  Cyclic permutation property:

is exhaustive: Prefix property: if then for every prefix s of u.  Cyclic permutation property: Example: the set

E contains also the following: (4), (4,1),(4,1,3), (1), (3), (5),(5,4),(5,4,1),(5,4,1,3) E is the set of messages sent by the Chang & Roberts’ algorithm!

Lemma: Let such that is a prefix of and, and let A be a maximum finding algorithm. If in the execution of A on ring a message is sent, then in the execution of A on ring a message is sent. st u u

Theorem: For every maximum finding algorithm A for unidirectional rings, there exists an exhaustive set E(A), such that, for every ring s, A sends at least N(s,E(A)) messages on s. Proof: Let

1. E(A) is exhaustive 1a. Prefix property

1. E(A) is exhaustive 1b. Cyclic permutation property

2. At least N(s,E(A)) messages sent by A on s

Theorem: For every maximum finding algorithm A for unidirectional rings, and a set of n identities I, we have:

Theorem: In a unidirectional ring whose size n is unknown, the Chang & Roberts algorithm has an optimal message complexity of Exercise: What if n is known? What if synchronous?

References J. E. Burns, A formal model for message passing systems, TR-91, Indiana University, September 1980.

References E. Chang and R. Roberts, An improved algorithm for decentralized extrema-finding in circular configurations of processes, Communications of the ACM}, 22, 5, 1979, pp

References J. Pachl, E. Korach and D. Rotem Lower bounds for distributed maximum- finding algorithm. Journal of Association for Computing Machinery, Vol. 31, No. 4, Oct. 1984, pp