By Topic

A low-overhead recovery technique using quasi-synchronous checkpointing

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

2 Author(s)
Manivannan, D. ; Dept. of Comput. & Inf. Sci., Ohio State Univ., Columbus, OH, USA ; Singhal, M.

In this paper, we propose a quasi-synchronous checkpointing algorithm and a low-overhead recovery algorithm based on it. The checkpointing algorithm preserves process autonomy by allowing them to take checkpoints asynchronously and uses communication-induced checkpoint coordination for the progression of the recovery line which helps bound rollback propagation during a recovery. Thus, it has the easiness and low overhead of asynchronous checkpointing and the recovery time advantages of synchronous checkpointing. There is no extra message overhead involved during checkpointing and the additional checkpointing overhead is nominal. The algorithm ensures the existence of a recovery line consistent with the latest checkpoint of any process all the time. The recovery algorithm exploits this feature to restore the system to a state consistent with the latest checkpoint of a failed process. The recovery algorithm has no domino effect and a failed process needs only to rollback to its latest checkpoint and request the other processes to roll back to a consistent checkpoint. To avoid domino effect, it uses selective pessimistic message logging at the receiver end. The recovery is asynchronous for single process failure. Neither the recovery algorithm nor the checkpointing algorithm requires the channels to be FIFO. We do not use vector timestamps for determining dependency between checkpoints since vector timestamps generally result in high message overhead during failure-free operation

Published in:

Distributed Computing Systems, 1996., Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on

Date of Conference:

27-30 May 1996