Inhalt des Dokuments
Es gibt keine deutsche Übersetzung dieser Webseite.
Almost every computing system
nowadays is distributed, ranging from multi-core laptops to
Internet-scale services; understanding the principles of distributed
computing is hence important for the design and engineering of modern
computing systems. Fundamental issues that arise in reliable and
efficient distributed systems include developing adequate methods for
modeling failures and synchrony assumptions, determining precise
performance bounds on implementations of concurrent data structures,
capturing the trade-off between consistency and efficiency, and
demarcating the frontier of feasibility in distributed computing.
For example, popular Internet services and applications such as CNN.com, YouTube, Facebook, Skype, BitTorrent attract millions of users every day, and only by the effective load-balancing and collaboration of many thousand machines, an acceptable Quality-of-Service/Quality-of-Experience can be guaranteed. While distributed systems promise a good scalability as well as a high robustness, they pose challenging research problems, such as: How to design robust and scalable distributed architectures and services? How to coordinate access to a shared resource, e.g., by electing a leader? Or how to provide incentives for cooperation in an open, collaborative distributed system?
|Autor||Moscibroda, Thomas and Schmid, Stefan and Wattenhofer, Roger|
|Buchtitel||25th Annual Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC)|
|Ort||Denver, Colorado, USA|
|Zusammenfassung||Current peer-to-peer (P2P) systems often suffer from a large fraction of freeriders not contributing any resources to the network. Various mechanisms have been designed to overcome this problem. However, the selfish behavior of peers has aspects which go beyond resource sharing. This paper studies the effects on the topology of a P2P network if peers selfishly select the peers to connect to. In our model, a peer exploits locality properties in order to minimize the latency (or response times) of its lookup operations. At the same time, the peer aims at not having to maintain links to too many other peers in the system. We show that the resulting topologies can be much worse than if peers collaborated. Moreover, the network may never stabilize, even in the absence of churn.|