Search

Given a distributed computation and a global predicate, predicate detection involves determining whether there exists at least one consistent cut (or global state) of the computation that satisfies the predicate. On the other hand, computation slicing is concerned with computing the smallest subcomputation (with the least number of consistent cuts) that contains all consistent cuts of the computation satisfying the predicate. In this paper, we investigate the relationship between predicate detection and computation slicing and show that the two problems are actually equivalent. Specifically, given an algorithm to detect a predicate b in a computation C, we derive an algorithm to compute the slice of C with respect to b. The time complexity of the (derived) slicing algorithm is O(n∣E∣T), where n is the number of processes, E is the set of events, and O(T) is the time complexity of the detection algorithm. We discuss how the "equivalence" result of this paper can be utilized to derive a faster algorithm for solving the genera/predicate detection problem in many cases. Slicing algorithms described in our earlier papers are all offline in nature. In this paper, we also present two online algorithms for computing the slice. The first algorithm can be used to compute the slice for a general predicate. Its amortized time complexity is O(n(c+n)T) per event, where c is the average concurrency in the computation and O(T) is the time complexity of the detection algorithm. The second algorithm can be used to compute the slice for a regular predicate. Its amortized time complexity is only O(n2) per event. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Emerging network technologies have complex network interfaces that have renewed concerns about network reliability. In this paper, we present an effective low-overhead fault tolerance technique to recover from network interface failures. Failure detection is based on a software watchdog timer that detects network processor hangs and a self-testing scheme that detects interface failures other than processor hangs. The proposed self-testing scheme achieves failure detection by periodically directing the control flow to go through only active software modules in order to detect errors that affect instructions in the local memory of the network interface. Our failure recovery is achieved by restoring the state of the network interface using a small backup copy containing just the right amount of information required for complete recovery. The paper shows how this technique can be made to minimize the performance impact to the host system and be completely transparent to the user. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most weak memory consistency models are incapable of supporting a solution to mutual exclusion using only read and write operations to shared variables. Processor Consistency-Goodman's version (PC-G) is an exception. Ahamad et al. showed that Peterson's mutual exclusion algorithm is correct for PC-G, but Lamport's bakery algorithm is not. This paper derives a lower bound on the number of and type of (single or multiwriter) variables that a mutual exclusion algorithm must use in order to be correct for PC-G. Specifically, any such solution for n processes must use at least one multiwriter variable and n single-writer variables. Peterson's algorithm for two processes uses one multiwriter and two single-writer variables, and therefore establishes that this bound is tight for two processes. This paper presents a new n-process algorithm for mutual exclusion that is correct for PC-G and achieves the bound for any n. While Peterson's algorithm is fair, this extension to arbitrary n is not fair. Six known algorithms that use the same number and type of variables are shown to fail to guarantee mutual exclusion when the memory consistency model is only PC-G, as opposed to the Sequential Consistency model for which they were designed. A corollary of our investigation is that, in contrast to Sequential Consistency, multiwriter variables cannot be implemented from single-writer variables in a PC-G system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]