k-Arbiter: A safe and general scheme for h-out of-k mutual exclusion

Manabe, Yoshitsugu; Baldoni, Roberto; Raynal, Michel; Aoyagi, Saizo

doi:10.1016/s0304-3975(97)00303-4

Cited by 38 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The three properties are first discussed by Maekawa [44] for ordinary quorum systems, and are considered useful for a truly distributed implementation of mutual exclusion. Following that, symmetric quorum systems have also been pursued in the design of read/write quorums [36], k-coteries [37], and karbiters [46]. We shall also present a symmetric (m, 1)-coterie in Sect.…”

Section: Definitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Still, this approach has high message complexity as a process needs to acquire multiple quorums. Alternatively, the concept of k-arbiters has been proposed [46]. A k-arbiter is a set of quorums such that any k +1 quorums have a common element (and thus any f ≤ k + 1 quorums have a common element).…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The intersection property of k-arbiters guarantees that at least one process is aware of a potential conflict among processes' requests, and thus can act as an arbiter to resolve the conflict. Due to the tight intersection property, k-arbiters in general have large quorum size than k-coteries ( (n k/(k+1) ) for a symmetric k-arbiter [46]), and so some has attempted to modify the definition to reduce its size [48].…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

On quorum systems for group resources allocation

Joung

2010

Distrib. Comput.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a problem, called (n, m, k, d)-resource allocation, to model allocation of group resources with bounded capacity. Specifically, the problem concerns the scheduling of k identical resources among n processes which belong to m groups. Each resource can be used by at most d processes of the same group at a time, but no two processes of different groups can use a resource simultaneously. The problem captures two fundamental types of conflicts in mutual exclusion: k-exclusion's amount constraint on the number of processes that can share a resource, and group mutual exclusion's type constraint on the class of processes that can share a resource. We then study the problem in the message passing paradigm, and investigate quorum systems for the problem. We begin by establishing some basic and general results for quorum systems for the case of k = 1, based on which quorum systems for the general case can be understood and constructed. We found that the study of quorum systems for (n, m, 1, d)-resource allocation is related to some classical problems in combinatorics and in finite projective geometries. By applying the results there, we are able to obtain some optimal/near-optimal quorum systems.

show abstract

Section: Definitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On quorum systems for group resources allocation

Joung

2010

Distrib. Comput.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This general structure covers, as particular cases, several existing algorithms and gives space for the design of new algorithms for various topologies. Manabe et al [11] presented a general scheme for a quorumbased h-out of-k mutual exclusion algorithm that relies on a collection of quorums called k-arbiter.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

A QoS Aware Self Adaptive General Scheme to Solve GME Problem

Singh¹,

Dutta²,

Swaroop³

2015

IJCA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Group mutual exclusion problem (GME) is a resource allocation problem which allows concurrency along with mutual exclusion. The concept of GME can be applied to various fields having varying quality of service (QoS) requirements. The present paper presents a self adaptive general scheme to solve GME problem using token-based approach. The striking feature of the scheme is that it considers QoS requirements, checks the QoS requirements time to time and adapts its parameters if there are deviations from the expected behavior. The dynamic analysis of the scheme has also been presented in the present exposition.

show abstract

“…Σ k is a generalization of the quorum failure detector class Σ introduced in [11] (that does correspond to Σ 1 ), where it is shown to be the weakest failure detector class to implement an atomic register in a message-passing system whatever the number of process failures (''wait-free'' environment). It is interesting to notice that the intersection property of Σ k is the same as the one used to define k-coteries [20].…”

Section: The Quorum Familymentioning

confidence: 99%

On the road to the weakest failure detector for k-set agreement in message-passing systems

Bonnet

Raynal

2011

Theoretical Computer Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tIn the k-set agreement problem, each process (in a set of n processes) proposes a value and has to decide a proposed value in such a way that at most k different values are decided. While this problem can easily be solved in asynchronous systems prone to t process crashes when k > t, it cannot be solved when k ≤ t. For several years, the failure-detector-based approach has been investigated to circumvent this impossibility. While the weakest failure detector class to solve the k-set agreement problem in read/write shared memory systems has recently been discovered (PODC 2009), the situation is different in message-passing systems where the weakest failure detector classes are known only for the extreme cases k = 1 (consensus) and k = n − 1 (set agreement).This paper presents four contributions whose aim is to help pave the way to discover the weakest failure detector class for k-set agreement in message-passing systems. These contributions are the following. (a) The first is a new failure detector class, denoted Π k , that is such that Π 1 = Σ × Ω (the weakest class for k = 1), and Π n−1 = L (the weakest class for k = n − 1). (b) The second is an investigation of the structure of Π k that shows that Π k is the combination of two failure detector classes Σ k (that is new) and Ω k (they generalize the previous ''quorums'' and ''eventual leaders'' failure detector classes, respectively).(c) The third contribution concerns Σ k that is shown to be a necessary requirement (as far as information on failure is concerned) to solve the k-set agreement problem in messagepassing systems. (d) Finally, the last contribution is a Π n−1 -based algorithm that solves the (n − 1)-set agreement problem. This algorithm provides us with a new algorithmic insight on the way the (n − 1)-set agreement problem can be solved in asynchronous messagepassing systems. It is hoped that these contributions will help discover the weakest failure detector class for k-set agreement in message-passing systems.

show abstract

k-Arbiter: A safe and general scheme for h-out of-k mutual exclusion

Cited by 38 publications

References 22 publications

On quorum systems for group resources allocation

On quorum systems for group resources allocation

A QoS Aware Self Adaptive General Scheme to Solve GME Problem

On the road to the weakest failure detector for k-set agreement in message-passing systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About