The Space Complexity of Consensus from Swap
Author: 
Sean OvensAuthors Info & Claims
Sean OvensAuthors Info & ClaimsAbstract
Nearly thirty years ago, it was shown that \(\Omega (\sqrt {n})\) read/write registers are needed to solve randomized wait-free consensus among n processes. This lower bound was improved to n registers in 2018, which exactly matches known algorithms. The \(\Omega (\sqrt {n})\) space complexity lower bound actually applies to a class of objects called historyless objects, which includes registers, test-and-set objects, and readable swap objects. However, every known n-process obstruction-free consensus algorithm from historyless objects uses Ω (n) objects.
In this paper, we give the first Ω (n) space complexity lower bounds on consensus algorithms for two kinds of historyless objects. First, we show that any obstruction-free consensus algorithm from swap objects uses at least n-1 objects. More generally, we prove that any obstruction-free k-set agreement algorithm from swap objects uses at least \(\lceil \frac{n}{k}\rceil - 1\) objects. The k-set agreement problem is a generalization of consensus in which processes agree on no more than k different output values. This is the first non-constant lower bound on the space complexity of solving k-set agreement with swap objects when k > 1. We also present an obstruction-free k-set agreement algorithm from n-k swap objects, which exactly matches our lower bound when k=1.
Second, we show that any obstruction-free binary consensus algorithm from readable swap objects with domain size b uses at least \(\frac{n-2}{3b+1}\) objects. When b is a constant, this asymptotically matches the best known obstruction-free consensus algorithms from readable swap objects with unbounded domains. Since any historyless object can be simulated by a readable swap object with the same domain, our results imply that any obstruction-free consensus algorithm from historyless objects with domain size b uses at least \(\frac{n-2}{3b+1}\) objects. For b = 2, we show a slightly better lower bound of n-2. There is an obstruction-free binary consensus algorithm using 2n-1 readable swap objects with domain size 2, asymptotically matching our lower bound.
References
[1]
Yehuda Afek, Hagit Attiya, Danny Dolev, Eli Gafni, Michael Merritt, and Nir Shavit. 1993. Atomic snapshots of shared memory. J. ACM 40, 4 (Sept.1993), 873–890. DOI:
[2]
James H. Anderson. 1993. Composite registers. Distributed Computing 6, 3 (01 Apr.1993), 141–154. DOI:
[3]
James Aspnes and Maurice Herlihy. 1990. Fast randomized consensus using shared memory. Journal of Algorithms 11, 3 (1990), 441–461. DOI:
[4]
Hagit Attiya and Faith Ellen. 2014. Impossibility Results for Distributed Computing. Morgan & Claypool Publishers. DOI:
[5]
Elizabeth Borowsky and Eli Gafni. 1993. Generalized FLP impossibility result for t-Resilient asynchronous computations. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (San Diego, California, USA) (STOC’93). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 91–100. DOI:
[6]
Zohir Bouzid, Michel Raynal, and Pierre Sutra. 2018. Anonymous obstruction-free (n, k)-set agreement with n-k+1 atomic read/write registers. Distributed Comput. 31, 2 (2018), 99–117. DOI:
[7]
Jack R. Bowman. 2011. Obstruction-free snapshot, obstruction-free consensus, and fetch-and-add modulo k. TR2011-681 (2011).
[8]
James E. Burns and Nancy A. Lynch. 1993. Bounds on shared memory for mutual exclusion. Information and Computation 107, 2 (1993), 171–184. DOI:
[9]
Soma Chaudhuri. 1993. More choices allow more faults: Set consensus problems in totally asynchronous systems. Information and Computation 105, 1 (1993), 132–158. DOI:
[10]
Soma Chaudhuri and Paul Reiners. 1996. Understanding the set consensus partial order using the Borowsky-Gafni simulation. In Distributed Algorithms. Springer, Berlin, 362–379.
[11]
Benny Chor, Amos Israeli, and Ming Li. 1987. On processor coordination using asynchronous hardware. In Proceedings of the Sixth Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada) (PODC’87). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 86–97. DOI:
[12]
Benny Chor, Amos Israeli, and Ming Li. 1994. Wait-free consensus using asynchronous hardware. SIAM J. Comput. 23 (1994), 701–712.
[13]
Carole Delporte-Gallet, Hugues Fauconnier, Petr Kuznetsov, and Eric Ruppert. 2015. On the space complexity of set agreement. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (Donostia-San Sebastián, Spain) (PODC’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 271–280. DOI:
[14]
Faith Ellen, Panagiota Fatourou, and Eric Ruppert. 2007. Time lower bounds for implementations of multi-writer snapshots. J. ACM 54, 6 (Dec.2007), 30–es. DOI:
[15]
Faith Ellen, Rati Gelashvili, Nir Shavit, and Leqi Zhu. 2020. A complexity-based classification for multiprocessor synchronization. Distributed Computing 33, 2 (01 Apr.2020), 125–144. DOI:
[16]
Faith Ellen, Rati Gelashvili, and Leqi Zhu. 2018. Revisionist simulations: A new approach to proving space lower bounds. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (Egham, United Kingdom) (PODC’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 61–70. DOI:
[17]
Faith Fich, Maurice Herlihy, and Nir Shavit. 1998. On the space complexity of randomized synchronization. J. ACM 45, 5 (Sept.1998), 843–862. DOI:. A preliminary version appeared in PODC’93.
[18]
Michael Fischer, Nancy Lynch, and Mike Paterson. 1985. Impossibility of distributed consensus with one faulty process. J. ACM 32 (Apr.1985), 374–382. DOI:
[19]
Maurice Herlihy. 1991. Wait-free synchronization. 13, 1 (Jan.1991), 124–149. DOI:
[20]
Maurice Herlihy and Nir Shavit. 1999. The topological structure of asynchronous computability. J. ACM 46, 6 (Nov.1999), 858–923. DOI:. A preliminary version appeared in PODC’93.
[21]
Michael C. Loui and Hosame H. Abu-Amara. 1987. Memory requirements for agreement among unreliable asynchronous processes. Advances in Computing Research 4, 163-183 (1987), 5–3.
[22]
Sean Ovens. 2021. The space complexity of scannable binary objects. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (Virtual Event, Italy) (PODC’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 509–519. DOI:
[23]
Sean Ovens. 2022. The space complexity of consensus from swap. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (Salerno, Italy) (PODC’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 176–186. DOI:
[24]
Michael Saks and Fotios Zaharoglou. 2000. Wait-free k-Set agreement is impossible: The topology of public knowledge. SIAM J. Comput. 29, 5 (2000), 1449–1483. DOI:. A preliminary version appeared in STOC’93.
[25]
Leqi Zhu. 2019. A tight space bound for consensus. SIAM J. Comput. 50, 3 (2019). DOI:. A preliminary version appeared in STOC’16.
Index Terms
- The Space Complexity of Consensus from Swap
Recommendations
The Space Complexity of Consensus from Swap
PODC'22: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed ComputingNearly thirty years ago, it was shown that Ω(√n ) read/write registers are needed to solve obstruction-free consensus among n processes. This lower bound was improved to n registers in 2018, which exactly matches the best upper bound. The Ømega (√n) ...
On the space complexity of randomized synchronization
The “waite-free hierarchy” provides a classification of multiprocessor synchronization primitives based on the values of n for which there are deterministic wait-free implementations of n-process consensus using instances of these objects and read-write ...
The k-simultaneous consensus problem
This paper introduces and investigates the k-simultaneous consensus task: each process participates at the same time in k independent consensus instances until it decides in any one of them. It is shown that the k-simultaneous consensus task is ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
February 2024
262 pages
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 11 February 2024
Online AM: 02 November 2023
Accepted: 11 October 2023
Revised: 28 July 2023
Received: 16 December 2022
Published in JACM Volume 71, Issue 1
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Funding Sources
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
- Ontario Graduate Scholarship (OGS) Program
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 207Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)172
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)18
Reflects downloads up to 16 Jan 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in