Distributed computing

"Distributed Information Processing" redirects here. For the computer company, see DIP
Research.

Distributed computing is a field of computer science that studies distributed systems. A

distributed system is a system whose components are located on different networked
computers, which communicate and coordinate their actions by passing messages to
one another.[1] The components interact with one another in order to achieve a
common goal. Three significant characteristics of distributed systems are: concurrency
of components, lack of a global clock, and independent failure of components.[1]
Examples of distributed systems vary from SOA-based systems to massively multiplayer
online games to peer-to-peer applications.

A computer program that runs within a distributed system is called a distributed

program (and distributed programming is the process of writing such programs).[2]
There are many different types of implementations for the message passing mechanism,
including pure HTTP, RPC-like connectors and message queues.[3]

Distributed computing also refers to the use of distributed systems to solve

computational problems. In distributed computing, a problem is divided into many
tasks, each of which is solved by one or more computers,[4] which communicate with
each other via message passing.[5]

Introduction[edit]

The word distributed in terms such as "distributed system", "distributed programming",

and "distributed algorithm" originally referred to computer networks where individual
computers were physically distributed within some geographical area.[6] The terms are
nowadays used in a much wider sense, even referring to autonomous processes that run
on the same physical computer and interact with each other by message passing.[5]
While there is no single definition of a distributed system,[7] the following defining
properties are commonly used as:

There are several autonomous computational entities (computers or nodes), each of

which has its own local memory.[8]

The entities communicate with each other by message passing.[9]

A distributed system may have a common goal, such as solving a large computational
problem;[10] the user then perceives the collection of autonomous processors as a unit.
Alternatively, each computer may have its own user with individual needs, and the
purpose of the distributed system is to coordinate the use of shared resources or
provide communication services to the users.[11]

Other typical properties of distributed systems include the following:

The system has to tolerate failures in individual computers.[12]

The structure of the system (network topology, network latency, number of

computers) is not known in advance, the system may consist of different kinds of
computers and network links, and the system may change during the execution of a
distributed program.[13]

Each computer has only a limited, incomplete view of the system. Each computer may
know only one part of the input.[14]

Parallel and distributed computing[edit]

(a), (b): a distributed system.

(c): a parallel system.

Distributed systems are groups of networked computers which share a common goal for
their work. The terms "concurrent computing", "parallel computing", and "distributed
computing" have much overlap, and no clear distinction exists between them.[15] The
same system may be characterized both as "parallel" and "distributed"; the processors in
a typical distributed system run concurrently in parallel.[16] Parallel computing may be
seen as a particular tightly coupled form of distributed computing,[17] and distributed
computing may be seen as a loosely coupled form of parallel computing.[7]
Nevertheless, it is possible to roughly classify concurrent systems as "parallel" or
"distributed" using the following criteria:

In parallel computing, all processors may have access to a shared memory to

exchange information between processors.[18]

In distributed computing, each processor has its own private memory (distributed
memory). Information is exchanged by passing messages between the processors.[19]

The figure on the right illustrates the difference between distributed and parallel
systems. Figure (a) is a schematic view of a typical distributed system; the system is
represented as a network topology in which each node is a computer and each line
connecting the nodes is a communication link. Figure (b) shows the same distributed
system in more detail: each computer has its own local memory, and information can be
exchanged only by passing messages from one node to another by using the available
communication links. Figure (c) shows a parallel system in which each processor has a
direct access to a shared memory.

The situation is further complicated by the traditional uses of the terms parallel and
distributed algorithm that do not quite match the above definitions of parallel and
distributed systems (see below for more detailed discussion). Nevertheless, as a rule of
thumb, high-performance parallel computation in a shared-memory multiprocessor uses
parallel algorithms while the coordination of a large-scale distributed system uses
distributed algorithms.[20]

History[edit]
The use of concurrent processes which communicate through message-passing has its
roots in operating system architectures studied in the 1960s.[21] The first widespread
distributed systems were local-area networks such as Ethernet, which was invented in
the 1970s.[22]

ARPANET, the predecessor of the Internet, was introduced in the late 1960s, and
ARPANET e-mail was invented in the early 1970s. E-mail became the most successful
application of ARPANET,[23] and it is probably the earliest example of a large-scale
distributed application. In addition to ARPANET (and its successor, the Internet), other
early worldwide computer networks included Usenet and FidoNet from the 1980s, both
of which were used to support distributed discussion systems.[24]

The study of distributed computing became its own branch of computer science in the
late 1970s and early 1980s. The first conference in the field, Symposium on Principles of
Distributed Computing (PODC), dates back to 1982, and its counterpart International
Symposium on Distributed Computing (DISC) was first held in Ottawa in 1985 as the
International Workshop on Distributed Algorithms on Graphs.[25]

Architectures[edit]

Various hardware and software architectures are used for distributed computing. At a
lower level, it is necessary to interconnect multiple CPUs with some sort of network,
regardless of whether that network is printed onto a circuit board or made up of loosely
coupled devices and cables. At a higher level, it is necessary to interconnect processes
running on those CPUs with some sort of communication system.[26]

Distributed programming typically falls into one of several basic architectures: client–
server, three-tier, n-tier, or peer-to-peer; or categories: loose coupling, or tight coupling.
[27]

Client–server: architectures where smart clients contact the server for data then
format and display it to the users. Input at the client is committed back to the server
when it represents a permanent change.
 Three-tier: architectures that move the client intelligence to a middle tier so that
stateless clients can be used. This simplifies application deployment. Most web
applications are three-tier.

n-tier: architectures that refer typically to web applications which further forward their
requests to other enterprise services. This type of application is the one most
responsible for the success of application servers.

Peer-to-peer: architectures where there are no special machines that provide a service
or manage the network resources.[28]:227 Instead all responsibilities are uniformly
divided among all machines, known as peers. Peers can serve both as clients and as
servers.[29] Examples of this architecture include BitTorrent and the bitcoin network.

Another basic aspect of distributed computing architecture is the method of

communicating and coordinating work among concurrent processes. Through various
message passing protocols, processes may communicate directly with one another,
typically in a master/slave relationship. Alternatively, a "database-centric" architecture
can enable distributed computing to be done without any form of direct inter-process
communication, by utilizing a shared database.[30] Database-centric architecture in
particular provides relational processing analytics in a schematic architecture allowing
for live environment relay. This enables distributed computing functions both within and
beyond the parameters of a networked database.[31]

Applications[edit]

Reasons for using distributed systems and distributed computing may include:

The very nature of an application may require the use of a communication network
that connects several computers: for example, data produced in one physical location
and required in another location.

There are many cases in which the use of a single computer would be possible in
principle, but the use of a distributed system is beneficial for practical reasons. For
example, it may be more cost-efficient to obtain the desired level of performance by
using a cluster of several low-end computers, in comparison with a single high-end
computer. A distributed system can provide more reliability than a non-distributed
system, as there is no single point of failure. Moreover, a distributed system may be
easier to expand and manage than a monolithic uniprocessor system.[32]

Examples[edit]

Examples of distributed systems and applications of distributed computing include the

following:[33]

telecommunication networks:

telephone networks and cellular networks,

computer networks such as the Internet,

wireless sensor networks,

routing algorithms;

network applications:

World Wide Web and peer-to-peer networks,

massively multiplayer online games and virtual reality communities,

distributed databases and distributed database management systems,

network file systems,

distributed cache such as burst buffers,

distributed information processing systems such as banking systems and airline

reservation systems;

real-time process control:

aircraft control systems,

industrial control systems;

parallel computation:
 scientific computing, including cluster computing, grid computing, cloud
computing,[34] and various volunteer computing projects (see the list of distributed
computing projects),

distributed rendering in computer graphics.

Theoretical foundations[edit]

Models[edit]

Many tasks that we would like to automate by using a computer are of question–answer
type: we would like to ask a question and the computer should produce an answer. In
theoretical computer science, such tasks are called computational problems. Formally, a
computational problem consists of instances together with a solution for each instance.
Instances are questions that we can ask, and solutions are desired answers to these
questions.

Theoretical computer science seeks to understand which computational problems can

be solved by using a computer (computability theory) and how efficiently
(computational complexity theory). Traditionally, it is said that a problem can be solved
by using a computer if we can design an algorithm that produces a correct solution for
any given instance. Such an algorithm can be implemented as a computer program that
runs on a general-purpose computer: the program reads a problem instance from input,
performs some computation, and produces the solution as output. Formalisms such as
random access machines or universal Turing machines can be used as abstract models
of a sequential general-purpose computer executing such an algorithm.[35][36]

The field of concurrent and distributed computing studies similar questions in the case
of either multiple computers, or a computer that executes a network of interacting
processes: which computational problems can be solved in such a network and how
efficiently? However, it is not at all obvious what is meant by "solving a problem" in the
case of a concurrent or distributed system: for example, what is the task of the algorithm
designer, and what is the concurrent or distributed equivalent of a sequential general-
purpose computer?[citation needed]
The discussion below focuses on the case of multiple computers, although many of the
issues are the same for concurrent processes running on a single computer.

Three viewpoints are commonly used:

Parallel algorithms in shared-memory model

All processors have access to a shared memory. The algorithm designer chooses the
program executed by each processor.

One theoretical model is the parallel random access machines (PRAM) that are used.
[37] However, the classical PRAM model assumes synchronous access to the shared
memory.

Shared-memory programs can be extended to distributed systems if the underlying

operating system encapsulates the communication between nodes and virtually unifies
the memory across all individual systems.

A model that is closer to the behavior of real-world multiprocessor machines and

takes into account the use of machine instructions, such as Compare-and-swap (CAS), is
that of asynchronous shared memory. There is a wide body of work on this model, a
summary of which can be found in the literature.[38][39]

Parallel algorithms in message-passing model

The algorithm designer chooses the structure of the network, as well as the program
executed by each computer.

Models such as Boolean circuits and sorting networks are used.[40] A Boolean circuit
can be seen as a computer network: each gate is a computer that runs an extremely
simple computer program. Similarly, a sorting network can be seen as a computer
network: each comparator is a computer.
Distributed algorithms in message-passing model

The algorithm designer only chooses the computer program. All computers run the
same program. The system must work correctly regardless of the structure of the
network.

A commonly used model is a graph with one finite-state machine per node.

In the case of distributed algorithms, computational problems are typically related to

graphs. Often the graph that describes the structure of the computer network is the
problem instance. This is illustrated in the following example.[citation needed]

An example[edit]

Consider the computational problem of finding a coloring of a given graph G. Different

fields might take the following approaches:

Centralized algorithms[citation needed]

The graph G is encoded as a string, and the string is given as input to a computer.
The computer program finds a coloring of the graph, encodes the coloring as a string,
and outputs the result.

Parallel algorithms

Again, the graph G is encoded as a string. However, multiple computers can access
the same string in parallel. Each computer might focus on one part of the graph and
produce a coloring for that part.

The main focus is on high-performance computation that exploits the processing

power of multiple computers in parallel.
Distributed algorithms

The graph G is the structure of the computer network. There is one computer for each
node of G and one communication link for each edge of G. Initially, each computer only
knows about its immediate neighbors in the graph G; the computers must exchange
messages with each other to discover more about the structure of G. Each computer
must produce its own color as output.

The main focus is on coordinating the operation of an arbitrary distributed system.

[citation needed]

While the field of parallel algorithms has a different focus than the field of distributed
algorithms, there is much interaction between the two fields. For example, the Cole–
Vishkin algorithm for graph coloring[41] was originally presented as a parallel algorithm,
but the same technique can also be used directly as a distributed algorithm.

Moreover, a parallel algorithm can be implemented either in a parallel system (using

shared memory) or in a distributed system (using message passing).[42] The traditional
boundary between parallel and distributed algorithms (choose a suitable network vs. run
in any given network) does not lie in the same place as the boundary between parallel
and distributed systems (shared memory vs. message passing).

Complexity measures[edit]

In parallel algorithms, yet another resource in addition to time and space is the number
of computers. Indeed, often there is a trade-off between the running time and the
number of computers: the problem can be solved faster if there are more computers
running in parallel (see speedup). If a decision problem can be solved in polylogarithmic
time by using a polynomial number of processors, then the problem is said to be in the
class NC.[43] The class NC can be defined equally well by using the PRAM formalism or
Boolean circuits—PRAM machines can simulate Boolean circuits efficiently and vice
versa.[44]
In the analysis of distributed algorithms, more attention is usually paid on
communication operations than computational steps. Perhaps the simplest model of
distributed computing is a synchronous system where all nodes operate in a lockstep
fashion. This model is commonly known as the LOCAL model. During each
communication round, all nodes in parallel (1) receive the latest messages from their
neighbours, (2) perform arbitrary local computation, and (3) send new messages to their
neighbors. In such systems, a central complexity measure is the number of synchronous
communication rounds required to complete the task.[45]

This complexity measure is closely related to the diameter of the network. Let D be the
diameter of the network. On the one hand, any computable problem can be solved
trivially in a synchronous distributed system in approximately 2D communication
rounds: simply gather all information in one location (D rounds), solve the problem, and
inform each node about the solution (D rounds).

On the other hand, if the running time of the algorithm is much smaller than D
communication rounds, then the nodes in the network must produce their output
without having the possibility to obtain information about distant parts of the network.
In other words, the nodes must make globally consistent decisions based on
information that is available in their local D-neighbourhood. Many distributed
algorithms are known with the running time much smaller than D rounds, and
understanding which problems can be solved by such algorithms is one of the central
research questions of the field.[46] Typically an algorithm which solves a problem in
polylogarithmic time in the network size is considered efficient in this model.

Another commonly used measure is the total number of bits transmitted in the network
(cf. communication complexity).[47] The features of this concept are typically captured
with the CONGEST(B) model, which similarly defined as the LOCAL model but where
single messages can only contain B bits.

Other problems[edit]

Traditional computational problems take the perspective that the user asks a question, a
computer (or a distributed system) processes the question, then produces an answer
and stops. However, there are also problems where the system is required not to stop,
including the dining philosophers problem and other similar mutual exclusion problems.
In these problems, the distributed system is supposed to continuously coordinate the
use of shared resources so that no conflicts or deadlocks occur.

There are also fundamental challenges that are unique to distributed computing, for
example those related to fault-tolerance. Examples of related problems include
consensus problems,[48] Byzantine fault tolerance,[49] and self-stabilisation.[50]

Much research is also focused on understanding the asynchronous nature of distributed

systems:

Synchronizers can be used to run synchronous algorithms in asynchronous systems.

[51]

Logical clocks provide a causal happened-before ordering of events.[52]

Clock synchronization algorithms provide globally consistent physical time stamps.

[53]

Election[edit]

Coordinator election (or leader election) is the process of designating a single process
as the organizer of some task distributed among several computers (nodes). Before the
task is begun, all network nodes are either unaware which node will serve as the
"coordinator" (or leader) of the task, or unable to communicate with the current
coordinator. After a coordinator election algorithm has been run, however, each node
throughout the network recognizes a particular, unique node as the task coordinator.
[54]

The network nodes communicate among themselves in order to decide which of them
will get into the "coordinator" state. For that, they need some method in order to break
the symmetry among them. For example, if each node has unique and comparable
identities, then the nodes can compare their identities, and decide that the node with
the highest identity is the coordinator.[54]

The definition of this problem is often attributed to LeLann, who formalized it as a

method to create a new token in a token ring network in which the token has been lost.
[55]

Coordinator election algorithms are designed to be economical in terms of total bytes

transmitted, and time. The algorithm suggested by Gallager, Humblet, and Spira [56] for
general undirected graphs has had a strong impact on the design of distributed
algorithms in general, and won the Dijkstra Prize for an influential paper in distributed
computing.

Many other algorithms were suggested for different kind of network graphs, such as
undirected rings, unidirectional rings, complete graphs, grids, directed Euler graphs, and
others. A general method that decouples the issue of the graph family from the design
of the coordinator election algorithm was suggested by Korach, Kutten, and Moran.[57]

In order to perform coordination, distributed systems employ the concept of

coordinators. The coordinator election problem is to choose a process from among a
group of processes on different processors in a distributed system to act as the central
coordinator. Several central coordinator election algorithms exist.[58]

Properties of distributed systems[edit]

So far the focus has been on designing a distributed system that solves a given
problem. A complementary research problem is studying the properties of a given
distributed system.[59][60]

The halting problem is an analogous example from the field of centralised computation:
we are given a computer program and the task is to decide whether it halts or runs
forever. The halting problem is undecidable in the general case, and naturally
understanding the behaviour of a computer network is at least as hard as understanding
the behaviour of one computer.[61]

However, there are many interesting special cases that are decidable. In particular, it is
possible to reason about the behaviour of a network of finite-state machines. One
example is telling whether a given network of interacting (asynchronous and non-
deterministic) finite-state machines can reach a deadlock. This problem is PSPACE-
complete,[62] i.e., it is decidable, but not likely that there is an efficient (centralised,
parallel or distributed) algorithm that solves the problem in the case of large networks.