This Article 
 Bibliographic References 
 Add to: 
Performance Evaluation of an Efficient Multiple Copy Update Algorithm
February 1994 (vol. 5 no. 2)
pp. 217-224

A well-known algorithm for updating multiple copies is the Thomas majority consensus algorithm. This algorithm, before performing an update, needs to obtain permission from a majority of the nodes in the system. We study the response-time behavior of a symmetric (each node seeks permission from the same number of other nodes and each node receives requests for update permission from the same number of other nodes) distributed update-synchronization algorithm where nodes need to obtain permission from only O(/spl radic/N) (N being the number of database copies) other nodes before performing an update. The algorithm we use is an adaptation of Maekawa's O(/spl radic/N) distributed mutual exclusion algorithm to multiple-copy update-synchronization. This increase in the efficiency of the update-synchronization algorithm enhances performance in two ways. First, the reduction in transaction service time reduces the response time. Second, for a given arrival rate of transactions, the decrease in response time reduces the number of waiting transactions in the system. This reduces the probability of conflict between transactions. To capture the interaction between the probability of conflict and the transaction response time, we define a new measure called the conflict response-time product. Based on the solution of a queueing model we show that optimizing this measure yields a different and more appropriate choice of system parameters than simply minimizing the mean transaction response time.

[1] A. A. Albert and R. Sandler.An Introduction to Finite Projective Planes. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968.
[2] S. Y. Cheung, M. Ammar, and M. Ahamad "The grid protocol: A high performance scheme for maintaining replicated data,"Proc. Sixth Int. Conf. of Data Eng., 1990, pp. 438-445.
[3] C. Colbourn and P. C. van Oorschot. "Combinatorial designs in computer science,"ACM Computing Surveys. vol. 21, June 1989.
[4] D. Eager, E. Lazowska, and J. Zahorjan, "Adaptive load sharing in homogeneous distributed systems,"IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. SE-12, no. 5, pp. 662-675, May 1986.
[5] H. Garcia-Molina and D. Barbara, "How to assign votes in a distributed systems,"J. ACM, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 841-860, Oct. 1985.
[6] D. Gifford, "Weighted voting for replicated data," inProc. 7th ACM Symp. Oper. Syst. Principles, Dec. 1979, pp. 150-162.
[7] G. H. Hardy and E. M. Wright. "Theorem 418." inAn Introduction to the Theory of Numbers. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1954, p. 343.
[8] A. J. Hoffman and R. R. Singleton. "On Moore graphs with diameter 2 and 3,"IBM J. Res. Develop., vol. 4, pp. 497-504, 1960.
[9] L. Kleinrock,Queueing Systems Volume 1: Theory. New York: John Wiley, 1975. ch. 2.
[10] T. V. Lakshman and A. K. Agrawala, "O(NSQRT(N)) Decentralized commit protocols," inProc. Fifth Symp. Reliability in Distributed Software and Database Syst., Jan. 1986, pp. 104-110.
[11] T. V. Lakshman and A. K. Agrawala, "Efficient decentralized consensus protocols,"IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. SE-12, no. 5, pp. 600-607, May 1986.
[12] T. V. Lakshman and V. K. Wei, "On computing functions of distributed information," Presented at theProc. 26th Annu. Allerton Conf. Computing. Commun., and Contr., Oct. 1988.
[13] L. Lamport, "Time, clocks, and the ordering of events in a distributed system,"Commun. ACM, vol. 21, no. 7, pp. 558-565, July 1978.
[14] M. Maekawa, "A√N algorithm for mutual exclusion in decentralized systems,"ACM Trans. Comput. Syst., vol. 3, no. 2, May 1985.
[15] S. J. Mullender and P. M. B. Vitanyi, "Distributed matchmaking for processes in computer networks," Rep. CS R8424, Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica, Amsterdam, Dec. 1984.
[16] F. S. Roberts,Applied Combinatorics. Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1984, Sect. 9.3.3, 9.3.4, and 9.3.5.
[17] S. Salza and S. S. Lavenberg. "Approximating response time distributions in closed queueing networkmodels of computer performance,"Performance. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1981, pp. 133-145.
[18] M. Singhal and Y. Yesha, "A polynomial algorithm for computation of the probability of conflicts in a database under arbitrary data access distribution,"Inform. Processig Lett., vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 69-74, Feb. 1988.
[19] M. Singhal and Y. Yesha, "Analysis of transaction blocking in arbitrary data access distribution in database systems," presented at theProc. 2nd Int. Workshop on Appl. Math. and Perform./Reliability Models of Comput/Commun. Syst., Univ. of Rome II, Rome, Italy, May 25-29, 1987.
[20] R. Thomas, "A majority consensus approach to concurrency control,"ACM Trans. Database Syst., vol. 4, pp. 180-209, June 1979.
[21] D. Towsley and S. K. Tripathi, "A single server priority queue with server failure and queue flushing," Dept. of Comput. Sci., Rep. TR-2207, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, Feb. 1989.

Index Terms:
Index Termsperformance evaluation; performance evaluation; transaction processing; distributeddatabases; performance evaluation; multiple copy update algorithm; Thomas majorityconsensus algorithm; response-time behavior; distributed update-synchronizationalgorithm; distributed mutual exclusion algorithm; multiple-copy update-synchronization;queueing model
T.V. Lakshman, D. Ghosal, "Performance Evaluation of an Efficient Multiple Copy Update Algorithm," IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 217-224, Feb. 1994, doi:10.1109/71.265949
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.