1 / 19

Chapter 12

Chapter 12 . Message Ordering. Causal Ordering . A single message should not be overtaken by a sequence of messages Stronger than FIFO Example of FIFO but not causal. Causal and FIFO ordering . FIFO: Any two messages from a process P i to P j are received Causal:

terris
Télécharger la présentation

Chapter 12

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Chapter 12 Message Ordering

  2. Causal Ordering • A single message should not be overtaken by a sequence of messages • Stronger than FIFO • Example of FIFO but not causal

  3. Causal and FIFO ordering • FIFO: • Any two messages from a process Pi to Pj are received • Causal: • If r1 , r2 are the receive events on some process and s1, s2 are the corresponding send events :

  4. Algorithm for causal ordering • Maintain a matrix M[1..N,1..N] at each process • When Pi sends a message to Pj • M[i,j] = M[i,j] + 1 • Piggyback M with the message • When Pi receives a message with matrix W from Pj • If Then receive message else block M = max (M, W)

  5. Algorithm for causal ordering • The entry M[k,j] at process i , records the number of messages sent by j to process k as known by process I • If a process i receives a message from j with the matrix W then • If W[k,i] >M[k,i] then j knows of a message k has sent to i , though i has not received the message till then. Hence process i blocks the message from j.

  6. Algorithm

  7. Applications • Causal chat – Figure 12.5 • Uses Causal Linker Figure 12.4 • P0 P1 • P1 P2 • P0 P2 • If P0 sends a message to P1 and P2 and P1 sends a reply to both P0 and P2 then causal linker gives the guarantee that P1’s reply cannot reach P2 before the original query

  8. Synchronous Ordering • Equivalent to a computation in which all messages are logically instantaneous • Stronger than Causal and FIFO ordering • Formally, let be the set of all external events. Then, • a computation is synchronous iff there exists a • mapping T from to the set of natural numbers such that and

  9. Examples Non-Synchronous Synchronous

  10. Synchronous order : Algorithm • The algorithm cannot be totally symmetric (if two processes wish to simultaneously send messages to each other) • Use process numbers to order all processes • Use control messages to enforce synchronous ordering

  11. Synchronous order : Algorithm • Messages: • Big : sent by a bigger process to smaller process • Small: sent by a smaller process to bigger process • All processes are initially active • An active process can send a big message • After sending turn passive till an ack is received • Passive process cannot send or receive any message (except, of course, the ack )

  12. Synchronous order : Algorithm • Small messages: • Request permission from the bigger process before sending • Permission can be granted by an active process. The bigger process turns passive after granting the permission • Once the message is received the bigger process can turn active

  13. Algorithm

  14. Total order for multicast messages • If process Pi sends messages x, y to processes Pj, Pk ,.. then all the processes Pj, Pk … receive the messages in the same order (x,y or y,x) • Observe that this does not imply causal or even FIFO ordering • Algorithms: • Similar to the mutex problem • Assume FIFO channels

  15. Centralized and Lamport Algorithms • Assume FIFO channels • Broadcast a message   requestCS • Centralized: Coordinator multicasts the message instead of sending the lock • Lamport: • The broadcast is stored in a queue by all processes and a timestamped ack is sent back • A process can deliver (act on) a message with timestamp t in its request queue if it has received a message with timestamp greater than t from all other processes ( Entering the CS in Lamport’s mutex algorithm)

  16. Skeen’s Algorithm • Lamport’s Algorithm is wasteful if messages are multicast (the other processes simple ignore the messages) • Skeen’s algorithm results in # of messages proportional to the number of recipients of the message

  17. Skeen’s Algorithm • Send a timestamped message to all the destination processes • On receiving a message, a process marks it as undeliverable and sends the value of the logical clock as the proposed timestamp to the initiator • Set the max of all proposals as the final timestamp and send to all destinations • On receiving the final timestamp of a message, it is marked as deliverable. • A deliverable message is delivered if it has the smallest timestamp in the message queue.

  18. 0 1 • Process 0 multicasts msg to 1 and 2 • On receiving 1 and 2 they mark it undeliverable and send propose with values 2 and 4 respectively • If 1 receives another message from a lower priority process (say with id 3), then it ignores the message till it has received final from 0 • Process 0 takes the max of the proposed timestamps and send out final 4 to processes 1 and 2 • Processes 1 and 2 mark msg as deliverable and deliver it if it has the smallest timestamp 2

  19. Application • Replicated State Machine • Provide fault tolerant service using multiple servers • All machines should process all requests in the same order • Use total ordering of messages

More Related