Agreement Protocols in Distributed Systems
Last Updated :
05 Aug, 2024
Agreement protocols in distributed systems ensure that multiple nodes or processes reach a consensus on a shared state or decision despite failures and network partitions. This introduction explores the fundamental concepts, challenges, and key protocols used to achieve reliable agreement in decentralized environments.
Important Topics for Agreement Protocol in Distributed Systems
What are Distributed Systems?
Distributed systems are networks of independent computers that work together to achieve a common goal, appearing as a single cohesive system to users. They share resources, such as processing power and storage, and communicate over a network to provide reliable and scalable services, often handling tasks like data processing, file sharing, and web services. Key characteristics include:
- Geographic Distribution: Components may be spread across different locations.
- Concurrency: Multiple processes execute simultaneously.
- Fault Tolerance: The system can continue functioning even if some components fail.
- Scalability: It can grow and handle increased loads by adding more resources.
What are Agreement Protocols in Distributed Systems?
Agreement protocols in distributed systems are mechanisms that ensure all participating nodes or processes reach a consensus on a single decision or state despite potential failures, network partitions, or asynchronous communication. These protocols are crucial for maintaining consistency and reliability in decentralized environments. Key types include:
- Consensus Protocols: Ensure all nodes agree on a single value or decision (e.g., Paxos, Raft).
- Atomic Broadcast: Guarantees that messages are delivered to all nodes in the same order (e.g., Total Order Broadcast).
- Two-Phase Commit (2PC): A protocol for ensuring all participants in a distributed transaction agree to commit or abort the transaction.
Agreement protocols handle challenges such as network failures, process crashes, and message delays, ensuring the system operates reliably and consistently.
Importance of Agreement Protocols in Distributed Systems
Agreement protocols are crucial in distributed systems for several reasons:
- Consistency: They ensure all nodes or processes agree on a single state or decision, maintaining consistency across the system despite failures or network partitions.
- Fault Tolerance: By enabling consensus even when some components fail, agreement protocols enhance the system's ability to recover and continue operating.
- Coordination: They facilitate coordinated actions and resource management among distributed nodes, crucial for tasks like distributed transactions and coordination of tasks.
- Reliability: Agreement protocols help ensure that distributed systems function correctly and consistently, which is essential for critical applications like financial transactions and cloud services.
- Scalability: They support scalable and reliable communication and operation as the system grows and more nodes are added.
Types of Agreement Protocols in Distributed Systems
Agreement protocols in distributed systems are designed to ensure that all participating nodes or processes agree on a single decision or state despite failures and network issues. Key types include:
1. Consensus Protocols
- Paxos: Achieves consensus by ensuring that a majority of nodes agree on a proposed value. It deals with node failures and network partitions but can be complex to implement.
- Raft: A more understandable consensus protocol compared to Paxos, Raft uses a leader-follower model to manage log replication and ensure that all nodes agree on the state changes.
- Basic Two-Phase Commit (2PC): A protocol used to coordinate a distributed transaction by having a coordinator node ask all participant nodes to either commit or abort the transaction. It ensures all nodes agree on the transaction outcome but can be vulnerable to blocking if participants or coordinators fail.
3. Three-Phase Commit (3PC)
- Three-Phase Commit (3PC): An extension of 2PC that adds an additional phase to reduce the likelihood of blocking. It introduces a pre-commit phase to improve fault tolerance and ensure that the protocol can handle coordinator failures more gracefully.
4. Atomic Broadcast Protocols
- Total Order Broadcast: Guarantees that all messages are delivered to all nodes in the same order. This protocol ensures that even if nodes receive messages out of order, they will process them in a consistent sequence.
- Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance (PBFT): Designed to handle Byzantine failures where nodes may act maliciously or arbitrarily. PBFT achieves consensus by requiring a majority of nodes to agree on a decision, assuming some nodes might be faulty or malicious.
Each type of protocol addresses specific challenges related to achieving consensus in distributed environments, ranging from simple fail-stop failures to more complex Byzantine failures.
Classical Agreement Protocols in Distributed Systems
Classical agreement protocols in distributed systems are fundamental mechanisms designed to ensure consistency and consensus among distributed nodes or processes. Here are some of the most well-known classical protocols:
Paxos is a consensus algorithm that enables a group of distributed nodes to agree on a single value, even if some nodes fail. It is designed to handle node crashes and network partitions.
- Key Components:
- Proposers: Propose values to be agreed upon.
- Acceptors: Accept proposals and decide on a value.
- Learners: Learn the value chosen by the majority of acceptors.
- Phases:
- Prepare: A proposer requests to become a leader by sending a prepare request to acceptors.
- Promise: Acceptors respond with a promise not to accept lower-numbered proposals and provide information about any previously accepted proposals.
- Propose: The proposer sends a proposal to the acceptors, who then decide if the proposal is accepted.
- Strengths: Ensures consensus despite failures of some nodes; widely studied and implemented.
- Weaknesses: Complex to implement and understand; can face performance issues with large numbers of nodes.
2PC is a protocol used to coordinate distributed transactions to ensure that all participants either commit or abort the transaction. It is simpler compared to Paxos but can suffer from blocking issues.
- Phases:
- Prepare Phase: The coordinator node asks all participant nodes to prepare for the transaction and vote on whether to commit or abort.
- Commit Phase: Based on votes, the coordinator instructs all participants to either commit the transaction if all agree or abort if any participant votes to abort.
- Strengths: Simplicity in coordination and implementation; guarantees atomicity of transactions.
- Weaknesses: Blocking can occur if the coordinator or participants fail; no progress if some participants do not respond.
3. Three-Phase Commit (3PC)
3PC is an enhancement of 2PC designed to reduce the likelihood of blocking. It adds an additional phase to improve fault tolerance.
- Phases:
- Can Commit Phase: The coordinator asks participants if they are able to commit. Participants respond with either "Yes" or "No."
- Pre-Commit Phase: If all participants reply "Yes," the coordinator sends a pre-commit message. Participants then prepare to commit.
- Do Commit Phase: The coordinator sends a commit message if all participants have acknowledged the pre-commit phase. Participants commit the transaction.
- Strengths: Reduces blocking compared to 2PC; handles some failures more gracefully.
- Weaknesses: More complex than 2PC; still vulnerable to certain types of failures.
4. Atomic Broadcast (Total Order Broadcast)
Atomic Broadcast ensures that all messages are delivered to all nodes in the same order. It is crucial for maintaining consistency in systems where message ordering is important.
- Key Concepts:
- Total Order: All nodes see the messages in the same order.
- Atomicity: Guarantees that either all nodes receive the message or none do.
- Strengths: Ensures consistent message ordering across distributed nodes.
- Weaknesses: Can be complex to implement; may introduce additional latency.
BFT protocols handle cases where nodes may act maliciously or arbitrarily (Byzantine failures). They ensure consensus despite nodes exhibiting faulty or adversarial behavior. Example: Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance (PBFT):
- Phases:
- Pre-Prepare: The primary node proposes a value.
- Prepare: Nodes validate the proposal and broadcast their votes.
- Commit: Nodes finalize the decision based on the majority agreement.
- Strengths: Handles arbitrary and malicious failures; ensures consensus in adversarial environments.
- Weaknesses: Higher overhead and complexity compared to non-Byzantine protocols.
These classical agreement protocols form the basis for many distributed systems' consensus and coordination mechanisms, addressing various challenges related to consistency, reliability, and fault tolerance
Modern Agreement Protocols in Distributed Systems
Modern agreement protocols in distributed systems build on classical protocols to address new challenges, improve performance, and handle larger-scale or more complex environments. Here are some prominent modern agreement protocols:
1. Raft
Raft is a consensus algorithm designed to be more understandable and practical than Paxos. It uses a leader-based approach to manage log replication and ensure that all nodes in the system agree on the order of operations.
- Key Components:
- Leader: A node that manages the replication of logs and handles client requests.
- Followers: Nodes that replicate the leader’s log entries.
- Candidates: Nodes that seek to become the leader during elections.
- Phases:
- Leader Election: Nodes elect a leader to manage the consensus process.
- Log Replication: The leader replicates log entries to followers.
- Safety and Commitment: Once a majority of nodes replicate an entry, it is considered committed.
- Strengths: Simplifies the consensus process with a clear leader and robust mechanisms for leader election and log replication.
- Weaknesses: The leader can become a bottleneck and single point of failure.
2. Tendermint
Tendermint is a Byzantine Fault Tolerant (BFT) consensus algorithm designed for high-performance blockchains and distributed applications. It achieves consensus despite nodes exhibiting arbitrary or malicious behavior.
- Key Components:
- Proposers: Propose new blocks or transactions.
- Validators: Validate proposed blocks and vote on them.
- BFT Protocol: Ensures consensus by requiring a supermajority of validators to agree.
- Phases:
- Proposal: A proposer suggests a new block.
- Pre-vote and Pre-commit: Validators vote on the proposal.
- Commit: A block is committed if it receives a supermajority of votes.
- Strengths: Provides high throughput and fast finality while tolerating malicious nodes.
- Weaknesses: Requires a supermajority of nodes to be honest or fault-free to achieve consensus.
3. Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance (PBFT)
PBFT is designed to tolerate Byzantine failures, where nodes may act arbitrarily or maliciously. It ensures that all non-faulty nodes reach agreement despite a fraction of nodes potentially being faulty.
- Key Components:
- Primary: Proposes new requests or transactions.
- Replicas: Validate and respond to requests.
- View Changes: Mechanism for changing the primary if it fails.
- Phases:
- Pre-prepare: The primary node proposes a request.
- Prepare: Replicas broadcast their agreement on the proposal.
- Commit: Replicas reach a consensus and execute the request.
- Strengths: Ensures robustness in adversarial environments and provides strong consistency.
- Weaknesses: High communication overhead and complexity due to the need for multiple phases and message exchanges.
Consensus in Blockchain Systems
Below is how consensus work in blockchain systems:
1. Proof of Work (PoW)
PoW requires participants (miners) to solve complex cryptographic puzzles to validate transactions and create new blocks. The first miner to solve the puzzle gets to add the block to the blockchain and is rewarded.
Example: Bitcoin uses PoW as its consensus mechanism.
2. Proof of Stake (PoS)
PoS selects validators based on the number of coins they hold and are willing to "stake" as collateral. Validators are chosen to create and validate blocks based on their stake and other factors like randomization.
Example: Ethereum plans to transition from PoW to PoS with Ethereum 2.0.
3. Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS)
DPoS involves stakeholders voting for a small number of delegates who validate transactions and create blocks on their behalf. This creates a more efficient but less decentralized model.
Example: EOS and TRON use DPoS for consensus.
4. Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance (PBFT)
PBFT is designed to handle Byzantine faults where nodes may act arbitrarily or maliciously. It requires a majority of nodes to agree on the validity of transactions and state changes.
Example: Hyperledger Fabric uses PBFT and similar variants in its consensus algorithms.
5. Proof of Authority (PoA)
PoA relies on a small number of trusted nodes (authorities) to validate transactions and create blocks. These nodes are pre-approved and known to be trustworthy.
Example: VeChain and certain instances of Ethereum-based private networks use PoA.
Challenges of Agreement Protocols in Distributed Systems
Key challenges of agreement protocols in distributed systems, summarized:
- Fault Tolerance: Handling node failures and maintaining consensus despite crashes or faulty behavior.
- Network Partitions: Managing split-brain scenarios and reconciling disconnected nodes when connectivity is restored.
- Scalability: Ensuring performance remains efficient as the number of nodes increases.
- Latency and Throughput: Balancing the time to reach consensus with the system’s transaction processing capacity.
- Complexity: Dealing with the complexity of implementation and ensuring correctness.
- Security: Protecting against malicious attacks and Byzantine failures.
- Leader Election: Efficiently electing and managing a leader node and handling leader failures.
Similar Reads
Atomic Commit Protocol in Distributed System In distributed systems, transactional consistency is guaranteed by the Atomic Commit Protocol. It coordinates two phasesâvoting and decisionâto ensure that a transaction is either fully committed or completely canceled on several nodes. Distributed TransactionsDistributed transaction refers to a tra
4 min read
Architecture Styles in Distributed Systems Architecture styles in distributed systems define how components interact and are structured to achieve scalability, reliability, and efficiency. This article explores key architecture stylesâincluding Peer-to-Peer, SOA, and othersâhighlighting their concepts, advantages, and applications in buildin
15+ min read
Synchronization in Distributed Systems Synchronization in distributed systems is crucial for ensuring consistency, coordination, and cooperation among distributed components. It addresses the challenges of maintaining data consistency, managing concurrent processes, and achieving coherent system behavior across different nodes in a netwo
11 min read
Logical Clock in Distributed System In distributed systems, ensuring synchronized events across multiple nodes is crucial for consistency and reliability. Enter logical clocks, a fundamental concept that orchestrates event ordering without relying on physical time. By assigning logical timestamps to events, these clocks enable systems
10 min read
Centralized Architecture in Distributed System The centralized architecture is defined as every node being connected to a central coordination system, and whatever information they desire to exchange will be shared by that system. A centralized architecture does not automatically require that all functions must be in a single place or circuit, b
5 min read
What is a Distributed System? A distributed system is a collection of independent computers that appear to the users of the system as a single coherent system. These computers or nodes work together, communicate over a network, and coordinate their activities to achieve a common goal by sharing resources, data, and tasks.Table o
7 min read