ReachingAgreementinthePresenceofFaults分析.ppt

Reaching Agreement in the Presence of Faults M. Pease, R. Shotak and L. Lamport Introduction The algorithm proposed by this paper offers the means by which independent processes can arrive at an exact mutual agreement. The algorithm works for greater than or equal to 3m+1 total processes (where m processes are faulty) Assumptions There are n isolated processes and no more than m are faulty Faulty processes need not be identified Processors communicate by means of two-party message The communication channel is fail-safe and has negligible delay Sender of a message is identifiable Goal Devise an algorithm based on an exchange of messages that allows each non-faulty process to compute an interactive consistency vector (of n values) such that The non-faulty processes compute the exact same vector The elements of the vector corresponding to a given non-faulty process is the private value of that process The above goal helps achieve interactive consistency The vector corresponding to the faulty process may be arbitrary as long as all non-faulty processes compute the exact same value for any faulty process No-Fault Case If there are no faults, each process will have the same interactive consistency vector (i.e., Each process has an identical vector containing the private values of each process) Single-Fault Case Consider obtaining interactive consistency for m=1 and n=4 Two rounds of information exchange are required Exchange private values in the first round Exchange results of the first round in the second round All non-faulty processes can record ‘NIL’ for the faulty process ICV value or the majority value for the faulty process is used Single-Fault Case M-fault Case m+1 rounds of information exchange are required to obtain interactive consistency in a system of m faulty processes Either the majority or NIL is used for vector values If broadcast is used for communication from round 2 onwards, a maximum of n*(m+1) messages are exchanged before an agreement is reached.