article

Time lower bounds for implementations of multi-writer snapshots

Authors:

Panagiota Fatourou,

Eric RuppertAuthors Info & Claims

Journal of the ACM (JACM), Volume 54, Issue 6

Pages 30 - es

https://doi.org/10.1145/1314690.1314694

Published: 01 December 2007 Publication History

Abstract

A snapshot object is an abstraction of the problem of obtaining a consistent view of the contents of shared memory in a distributed system, despite concurrent changes to the memory. There are implementations of m-component snapshot objects shared by n ≥ m processes using m registers. This is the minimum number of registers possible. We prove a time lower bound for implementations that use this minimum number of registers. It matches the time taken by the fastest such implementation. Our proof yields insight into the structure of any such implementation, showing that processes must access the registers in a very constrained way. We also prove a time lower bound for snapshot implementations using single-writer registers in addition to m historyless objects (such as registers and swap objects).

References

[1]

Afek, Y., Attiya, H., Dolev, D., Gafni, E., Merritt, M., and Shavit, N. 1993. Atomic snapshots of shared memory. J. ACM 40, 4 (Sept.), 873--890.

Digital Library

[2]

Afek, Y., Boxer, P., and Touitou, D. 2000. Bounds on the shared memory requirements for long-lived and adaptive objects. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing. ACM, New York, 81--89.

Digital Library

[3]

Anderson, J. H. 1993. Composite registers. Distrib. Comput. 6, 3 (Apr.), 141--154.

Digital Library

[4]

Anderson, J. H. 1994. Multi-writer composite registers. Distrib. Comput. 7, 4 (May), 175--195.

Digital Library

[5]

Anderson, J. H., and Yang, J.-H. 1996. Time/contention trade-offs for multiprocessor synchronization. Inf. Comput. 124, 1 (Jan.), 68--84.

Digital Library

[6]

Aspnes, J. 1993. Time- and space-efficient randomized consensus. J. Algorithms 14, 3 (May), 414--431.

Digital Library

[7]

Aspnes, J., and Herlihy, M. 1990a. Fast, randomized consensus using shared memory. J. Algorithms 11, 2 (Sept.), 441--461.

Digital Library

[8]

Aspnes, J., and Herlihy, M. 1990b. Wait-free data structures in the asynchronous PRAM model. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures. ACM, New York, 340--349.

Digital Library

[9]

Attiya, H., Ellen, F., and Fatourou, P. 2006. The complexity of updating multi-writer snapshot objects. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Distributed Computing and Networking. 319--330.

Digital Library

[10]

Attiya, H., Fich, F., and Kaplan, Y. 2004. Lower bounds for adaptive collect and related objects. In Proceedings of the 23th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing. ACM, New York, 60--69.

Digital Library

[11]

Attiya, H., and Fouren, A. 2001. Adaptive and efficient algorithms for lattice agreement and renaming. SIAM J. Comput. 31, 2 (Oct.), 642--664.

Digital Library

[12]

Attiya, H., Herlihy, M., and Rachman, O. 1995. Atomic snapshots using lattice agreement. Distrib. Comput. 8, 3, 121--132.

Digital Library

[13]

Attiya, H., Lynch, N., and Shavit, N. 1994. Are wait-free algorithms fast&quest; J. ACM 41, 4 (July), 725--763.

Digital Library

[14]

Attiya, H., and Rachman, O. 1998. Atomic snapshots in O(n log n) operations. SIAM J. Comput. 27, 2 (Apr.), 319--340.

Digital Library

[15]

Attiya, H., and Welch, J. 2004. Distributed Computing: Fundamentals, Simulations and Advanced Topics, 2nd ed. Wiley, New York.

[16]

Burns, J., and Lynch, N. 1993. Bounds on shared memory for mutual exclusion. Inf. Comput. 107, 2 (Dec.), 171--184.

Digital Library

[17]

Fatourou, P., Fich, F., and Ruppert, E. 2006. Time-space tradeoffs for implementations of snapshots. In Proceedings of the 38th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. ACM, New York, 169--178.

Digital Library

[18]

Fich, F., Herlihy, M., and Shavit, N. 1998. On the space complexity of randomized synchronization. J. ACM 45, 5 (Sept.), 843--862.

Digital Library

[19]

Fich, F., and Ruppert, E. 2003. Hundreds of impossibility results for distributed computing. Distrib. Comput. 16, 2--3 (Sept.), 121--163.

Digital Library

[20]

Gawlick, R., Lynch, N., and Shavit, N. 1992. Concurrent timestamping made simple. In Proceedings of the Israel Symposium on the Theory of Computing and Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 601, Springer-Verlag, New York, 171--183.

Digital Library

[21]

Herlihy, M. 1991a. Randomized wait-free concurrent objects. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing. ACM, New York, 11--21.

Digital Library

[22]

Herlihy, M. 1991b. Wait-free synchronization. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 13, 1 (Jan.), 124--149.

Digital Library

[23]

Herlihy, M. P., and Wing, J. M. 1990. Linearizability: A correctness condition for concurrent objects. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 12, 3 (July), 463--492.

Digital Library

[24]

Hoest, G., and Shavit, N. 2006. Towards a topological characterization of asynchronous complexity. SIAM J. Comput. 36, 2, 457--497.

Digital Library

[25]

Inoue, M., Chen, W., Masuzawa, T., and Tokura, N. 1994. Linear time snapshots using multi-writer multi-reader registers. In Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Distributed Algorithms. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 857, Springer-Varlag, New York, 130--140.

Digital Library

[26]

Israeli, A., Shaham, A., and Shirazi, A. 1995. Linear-time snapshot implementations in unbalanced systems. Math. Syst. Theor. 28, 5 (Sept./Oct.), 469--486.

[27]

Israeli, A., and Shirazi, A. 1998. The time complexity of updating snapshot memories. Inf. Process. Lett. 65, 1 (Jan.), 33--40.

Digital Library

[28]

Jayanti, P. 2005. An optimal multi-writer snapshot algorithm. In Proceedings of the 37th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. ACM, New York, 723--732.

Digital Library

[29]

Jayanti, P., Tan, K., and Toueg, S. 2000. Time and space lower bounds for nonblocking implementations. SIAM J. Comput. 30, 2 (June), 438--456.

Digital Library

[30]

Lynch, N. A. 1996. Distributed Algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA.

Digital Library

[31]

Riany, Y., Shavit, N., and Touitou, D. 2001. Towards a practical snapshot algorithm. Theor. Comput. Sci. 269, 1--2 (Oct.), 163--201.

[32]

Ruppert, E. 2000. Deterministic consensus numbers. SIAM J. Comput. 30, 4 (Aug.--Oct.), 1156--1168.

Digital Library

Cited By

Ovens S(2024)The Space Complexity of Consensus from SwapJournal of the ACM10.1145/363139071:1(1-26)Online publication date: 11-Feb-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3631390
Ovens SMilani AWoelfel P(2022)The Space Complexity of Consensus from SwapProceedings of the 2022 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing10.1145/3519270.3538420(176-186)Online publication date: 20-Jul-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3519270.3538420
Ovens SMiller ACensor-Hillel K(2021)The Space Complexity of Scannable Binary ObjectsProceedings of the 2021 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing10.1145/3465084.3467916(509-519)Online publication date: 21-Jul-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3465084.3467916
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Time lower bounds for implementations of multi-writer snapshots
1. Information systems
  1. Information storage systems
    1. Storage architectures
      1. Distributed storage
2. Theory of computation
  1. Design and analysis of algorithms

Recommendations

The complexity of updating multi-writer snapshot objects
PODC '07: Proceedings of the twenty-sixth annual ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing

This paper proves Ω(m) lower bounds on the step complexity of UPDATE operations for partitioned implementations of m-component multi-writer snapshot objects from base objects of any type. These are implementations in which each base object is only ...
Time-space tradeoffs for implementations of snapshots
STOC '06: Proceedings of the thirty-eighth annual ACM symposium on Theory of Computing

A snapshot object is an abstraction of the fundamental problem of obtaining a consistent view of the contents of the shared memory in a distributed system while other processes may concurrently update those contents. A snapshot object stores an array of ...
Single-scanner multi-writer snapshot implementations are fast!
PODC '06: Proceedings of the twenty-fifth annual ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing

Snapshot objects allow processes to obtain consistent global views of shared memory. A snapshot object consists of m components each capable of storing a value. The processes execute UPDATE operations to write new values in any of the components and ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Journal of the ACM

Journal of the ACM Volume 54, Issue 6

December 2007

185 pages

ISSN:0004-5411

EISSN:1557-735X

DOI:10.1145/1314690

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2007 ACM.

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 December 2007

Published in JACM Volume 54, Issue 6

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

11
Total Citations
View Citations
539
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)7
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 28 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Ovens S(2024)The Space Complexity of Consensus from SwapJournal of the ACM10.1145/363139071:1(1-26)Online publication date: 11-Feb-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3631390
Ovens SMilani AWoelfel P(2022)The Space Complexity of Consensus from SwapProceedings of the 2022 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing10.1145/3519270.3538420(176-186)Online publication date: 20-Jul-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3519270.3538420
Ovens SMiller ACensor-Hillel K(2021)The Space Complexity of Scannable Binary ObjectsProceedings of the 2021 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing10.1145/3465084.3467916(509-519)Online publication date: 21-Jul-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3465084.3467916
Fatourou PKallimanis N(2017)Lower and upper bounds for single-scanner snapshot implementationsDistributed Computing10.1007/s00446-016-0286-730:4(231-260)Online publication date: 1-Aug-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s00446-016-0286-7
Ruppert E(2016)Snapshots in Shared MemoryEncyclopedia of Algorithms10.1007/978-1-4939-2864-4_380(2017-2022)Online publication date: 22-Apr-2016
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2864-4_380
Delporte-Gallet CFauconnier HKuznetsov PRuppert EGeorgiou CSpirakis P(2015)On the Space Complexity of Set AgreementProceedings of the 2015 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing10.1145/2767386.2767406(271-280)Online publication date: 21-Jul-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2767386.2767406
Attiya HEllen F(2014)Impossibility Results for Distributed ComputingSynthesis Lectures on Distributed Computing Theory10.2200/S00551ED1V01Y201311DCT0125:1(1-162)Online publication date: 19-Jun-2014
https://doi.org/10.2200/S00551ED1V01Y201311DCT012
Giakkoupis GHelmi MHigham LWoelfel P(2013)An $O\sqrt n$ Space Bound for Obstruction-Free Leader ElectionProceedings of the 27th International Symposium on Distributed Computing - Volume 820510.1007/978-3-642-41527-2_4(46-60)Online publication date: 14-Oct-2013
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-642-41527-2_4
Attiya HGuerraoui RHendler DKuznetsov PMichael MVechev MBall TSagiv M(2011)Laws of orderProceedings of the 38th annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages10.1145/1926385.1926442(487-498)Online publication date: 26-Jan-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1926385.1926442
Attiya HGuerraoui RHendler DKuznetsov PMichael MVechev M(2011)Laws of orderACM SIGPLAN Notices10.1145/1925844.192644246:1(487-498)Online publication date: 26-Jan-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1925844.1926442
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

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

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Issue’s Table of Contents