Leaderless Consensus

K. Antoniadis, Antoine Desjardins, V. Gramoli, R. Guerraoui, I. Zablotchi
{"title":"Leaderless Consensus","authors":"K. Antoniadis, Antoine Desjardins, V. Gramoli, R. Guerraoui, I. Zablotchi","doi":"10.1109/ICDCS51616.2021.00045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Classical synchronous consensus algorithms are leaderless: processes exchange their proposals, retain the maximum value and decide when they see the same choice across a couple of rounds. Indulgent consensus algorithms are more robust in that they only require eventual synchrony, but are however typically leader-based. Intuitively, this is a weakness for a slow leader can delay any decision. This paper asks whether, under eventual synchrony, it is possible to deterministically solve consensus without a leader. The fact that the weakest failure detector to solve consensus is one that also eventually elects a leader seems to indicate that the answer to the question is negative. We prove in this paper that the answer is actually positive. We first give a precise definition of the very notion of a leaderless algorithm. Then we present three indulgent leaderless consensus algorithms, each we believe interesting in its own right: (i) for shared memory, (ii) for message passing with omission failures and (iii) for message passing with Byzantine failures (with and without authentication).","PeriodicalId":222376,"journal":{"name":"2021 IEEE 41st International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS)","volume":"206 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2021 IEEE 41st International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDCS51616.2021.00045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

Abstract

Classical synchronous consensus algorithms are leaderless: processes exchange their proposals, retain the maximum value and decide when they see the same choice across a couple of rounds. Indulgent consensus algorithms are more robust in that they only require eventual synchrony, but are however typically leader-based. Intuitively, this is a weakness for a slow leader can delay any decision. This paper asks whether, under eventual synchrony, it is possible to deterministically solve consensus without a leader. The fact that the weakest failure detector to solve consensus is one that also eventually elects a leader seems to indicate that the answer to the question is negative. We prove in this paper that the answer is actually positive. We first give a precise definition of the very notion of a leaderless algorithm. Then we present three indulgent leaderless consensus algorithms, each we believe interesting in its own right: (i) for shared memory, (ii) for message passing with omission failures and (iii) for message passing with Byzantine failures (with and without authentication).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
无领导的共识
经典的同步共识算法是无领导的:进程交换它们的建议,保留最大的值,并在几轮中看到相同的选择时决定。宽容的共识算法更健壮,因为它们只需要最终的同步,但通常是基于领导者的。直觉上,这是一个弱点,因为一个行动迟缓的领导者会拖延任何决定。本文的问题是,在最终同步下,是否有可能在没有领导者的情况下确定性地解决共识。在解决共识问题上,最弱的失败检测器最终也会选出一位领导人,这一事实似乎表明,这个问题的答案是否定的。我们在本文中证明了答案实际上是正的。我们首先对无领导算法的概念给出一个精确的定义。然后,我们提出了三种放纵的无领导共识算法,我们认为每一种算法都很有趣:(i)用于共享内存,(ii)用于遗漏失败的消息传递,(iii)用于拜占庭失败的消息传递(有和没有身份验证)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Practical Location Privacy Attacks and Defense on Point-of-interest Aggregates Hand-Key: Leveraging Multiple Hand Biometrics for Attack-Resilient User Authentication Using COTS RFID Recognizing 3D Orientation of a Two-RFID-Tag Labeled Object in Multipath Environments Using Deep Transfer Learning The Vertical Cuckoo Filters: A Family of Insertion-friendly Sketches for Online Applications Dyconits: Scaling Minecraft-like Services through Dynamically Managed Inconsistency
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1