Peer Replication with Selective Control

  • David H. Ratner
  • Peter L. Reiher
  • Gerald J. Popek
  • Richard G. Guy
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1748)


Many mobile environments require optimistic replication for improved performance and reliability. Peer-to-peer replication strategies provide advantages over traditional client-server models by enabling any-to-any communication. These advantages are especially useful in mobile environments, when communicating with close peers can be cheaper than communicating with a distant server. However, most peer solutions require that all replicas store the entire replication unit. Such strategies are inefficient and expensive, forcing users to store unneeded data and to spend scarce resources maintaining consistency on that data.

We have developed a set of algorithms and controls that implement selective replication, the ability to independently replicate individual portions of the large replication unit. We present a description of the algorithms and their implementation, as well as a performance analysis. We argue that these methods permit the practical use of peer optimistic replication.


Disk Space Garbage Collection Mobile Environment Replication Pattern Selective Control 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    R. G. Guy, G. J. Popek, and T. W. Page, Jr. Consistency algorithms for optimistic replication. In Proceedings of the First IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols. IEEE, Oct. 1993.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. G. Guy, P. L. Reiher, D. H. Ratner, M. F. Gunter, W. Ma, and G. J. Popek. Rumor: Mobile data access through optimistic peer-to-peer replication. In Advances in Database Technologies:ER’ 98 Workshops on Data Warehousing and Data Mining, Mobile Data Access, and Collaborative Work Support and Spatio-Temporal Data ManagementProceedings of the, number 1552 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 254–265. Springer Verlag, Nov. 1998.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. S. Heidemann, T. W. Page, Jr., R. G. Guy, and G. J. Popek. Primarily disconnected operation: Experiences with Ficus. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Management of Replicated Data, pages 2–5. University of California, Los Angeles, IEEE, Nov. 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. J. Kistler and M. Satyanarayanan. Disconnected operation in the Coda file system. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 10(1):325, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. H. Kuenning and G. J. Popek. Automated hoarding for mobile computers. In Proceedings of the 16th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, pages 264–275, St. Malo, France, Oct. 1997. ACM.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    L. B. Mummert, M. R. Ebling, and M. Satyanarayanan. Exploiting weak connectivity for mobile file access. In Proceedings of the 15th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, pages 143–155, Copper Mountain Resort, Colorado, Dec. 1995. ACM.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    T. W. Page, R. G. Guy, J. S. Heidemann, D. Ratner, P. Reiher, A. Goel, G. H. Kuenning, and G. J. Popek. Perspectives on optimistically replicated peer-to-peer filing. Software-Practice and Experience, 28(2):155–180, Feb. 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. S. Parker, Jr., G. Popek, G. Rudisin, A. Stoughton, B. J. Walker, E. Walton, J. M. Chow, D. Edwards, S. Kiser, and C. Kline. Detection of mutual inconsistency in distributed systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 9(3):240–247, May 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. Ratner, P. Reiher, and G. J. Popek. Roam: A scalable replication system for mobile computing. In MDDS’99: 2nd International Workshop on Mobility In Databases and Distributed Systems @ DEXA’99, Sept. 1999.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    D. H. Ratner. Selective replication: Fine-grain control of replicated files. Master’s thesis, University of California, Los Angeles, Mar. 1995. Available as UCLA technical report CSD-950007.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    P. Reiher, J. S. Heidemann, D. Ratner, G. Skinner, and G. J. Popek. Resolving file conflicts in the Ficus file system. In USENIX Conference Proceedings, pages 183–195, Boston, MA, June 1994. USENIX.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. Satyanarayanan, J. J. Kistler, P. Kumar, M. E. Okasaki, E. H. Siegel, and D. C. Steere. Coda: A highly available file system for a distributed workstation environment. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 39(4):447–459, Apr. 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. Siegel, K. Birman, and K. Marzullo. Deceit: A exible distributed file system. In USENIX Conference Proceedings, pages 51–61. USENIX, June 1990.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. B. Terry, M. M. Theimer, K. Petersen, A. J. Demers, M. J. Spreitzer, and C. H. Hauser. Managing update con icts in Bayou, a weakly connected replicated storage system. In Proceedings of the 15th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, pages 172–183, Copper Mountain Resort, Colorado, Dec. 1995. ACM.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    B. Walker, G. Popek, R. English, C. Kline, and G. Thiel. The LOCUS distributed operating system. In Proceedings of the Ninth Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, pages 49–70. ACM, Oct. 1983.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    A.-I. Wang, P. Reiher, and R. Bagrodia. A simulation evaluation of optimistic replicated filing in mobile environments. In Proceedings of the 18thProceedings of the 18th IEEE International Performance, Computing, and Communications Conference, Feb. 1999.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    B. Welch and J. Ousterhout. Prefix tables: A simple mechanism for locating files in a distributed system. Sixth International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, pages 184–189, May 19–23, 1986.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • David H. Ratner
    • 1
  • Peter L. Reiher
    • 1
  • Gerald J. Popek
    • 1
  • Richard G. Guy
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentUniversity of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations