This Article 
 Bibliographic References 
 Add to: 
Performance of the Optimal Causal Multicast Algorithm: A Statistical Analysis
January 2004 (vol. 15 no. 1)
pp. 40-52

Abstract—An optimal causal message ordering algorithm for asynchronous distributed systems was proposed by Kshemkalyani and Singhal and its optimality was proven theoretically. For a system of n processes, although the space complexity of this algorithm was shown to be O(n^2) integers, it was expected that the actual space overhead would be much less than n^2. It is difficult to determine the behavior of this algorithm by a theoretical analysis. In this paper, we measure the overheads of two different implementations of the optimal causal message ordering algorithm via simulation under a wide range of system conditions. The optimal algorithm is seen to display significantly less message space overhead and log space overhead than the canonical Raynal-Schiper-Toueg algorithm.

[1] Y. Amir et al., Transis:“A Communication Subsystem for High Availability,” Proc. Int’l Symp. Fault‐Tolerant Computing, IEEE CS Press, Los Alamitos, Calif., 1992, pp. 76‐84.
[2] K. Birman and T. Joseph, Reliable Communication in the Presence of Failures ACM Trans. Computer Systems, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 47-76, Feb. 1987.
[3] K. Birman, A. Schiper, and P. Stephenson, Lightweight Causal and Atomic Group Multicast ACM Trans. Computer Systems, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 272-314, Aug. 1991.
[4] P. Ezhilchelvan, R. Macedo, and S. Shrivastava, "Newtop: A Fault-Tolerant Group Communication Protocol," Proc. 15th Int'l Conf. Distributed Computing Systems, IEEE CS Press, Vancouver, BC, Canada, June 1995.
[5] S. Floyd and V. Paxson, "Difficulties in Simulating the Internet," IEEE/ACM Trans. Networking, vol. 9, no. 4, Aug. 2001, pp. 392–403; .
[6] P. Gambhire and A.D. Kshemkalyani, Evaluation of the Optimal Causal Message Ordering Algorithm Proc. Seventh Int'l High Performance Computing Conf., pp. 83-95, Dec. 2000.
[7] M.F. Kaashoek and A.S. Tanenbaum, “Group Communication in the Amoeba Distributed Operating System,” Proc. IEEE 11th Int'l Conf. Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), pp. 222-230, 1991.
[8] A.D. Kshemkalyani and M. Singhal, Necessary and Sufficient Conditions on Information for Causal Message Ordering and Their Optimal Implementation Distributed Computing, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 91-111, Apr. 1998. (Also appears as IBM Technical Report 29.2040, July 1995 and in conference format as A.D. Kshemkalyani, and M. Singhal, An Optimal Algorithm for Generalized Causal Message Ordering, Proc. 15th ACM Symp. Principles of Distributed Computing, p. 87, 1996.)
[9] L. Lamport, Time, Clocks, and the Ordering of Events in a Distributed System Comm. ACM, vol. 21, no. 7, pp. 558-565, July 1978.
[10] L.L. Peterson, N.C. Bucholz, and R.D. Schlichting, Preserving and Using Context Information in Interprocess Communication ACM Trans. Computer Systems, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 217-246, 1989.
[11] M. Raynal, A. Schiper, and S. Toueg, The Causal Ordering Abstraction and a Simple Way to Implement It Information Processing Letters, vol. 39, pp. 343-350, 1991.
[12] A. Schiper, A. Eggli, and A. Sandoz, A New Algorithm to Implement Causal Ordering Proc. Third Int'l Workshop Distributed Systems, pp. 219-232, 1989.

Index Terms:
Causal multicast, causal ordering, distributed system, performance, simulation.
Punit Chandra, Pranav Gambhire, Ajay D. Kshemkalyani, "Performance of the Optimal Causal Multicast Algorithm: A Statistical Analysis," IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 40-52, Jan. 2004, doi:10.1109/TPDS.2004.1264784
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.