A lower bound for nearly minimal adaptive and hot potato algorithms

  • Ishai Ben-Aroya
  • Donald D. ChinnEmail author
  • Assaf Schuster
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1136)


Recently, Chinn, Leighton, and Tompa [10] presented lower bounds for store-and-forward permutation routing algorithms on the n × n mesh with bounded buffer size and where a packet must take a shortest (or minimal) path to its destination. We extend their analysis to algorithms that are nearly minimal. (In their preliminary work, Chinn et al. [10] mention a similar result that seems, however, incorrect.) We also apply this technique to the domain of hot potato algorithms, where there is no storage of packets and the shortest path to a destination is not assumed (and is in general impossible).We show that “natural” variants and “improvements” of several algorithms in the literature perform poorly in the worst case. As a result, we identify algorithmic features that are undesirable for worst case hot potato permutation routing.

Researchers in hot potato routing have defined simple and greedy classes of algorithms. We show that when an algorithm is too simple and too greedy, its performance in routing permutations is poor in the worst case. Specifically, the technique of [10] is also applicable to algorithms that do not necessarily send packets in minimal or even nearly minimal paths: it may be enough that they naively attempt to do so when possible. In particular, our results show that a certain class of greedy algorithms that was suggested recently by Ben-Dor, Halevi, and Schuster [6] contains algorithms that have poor performance in routing worst case permutations.


Greedy Algorithm Minimal Path Buffer Space IEEE INFOCOM Outgoing Link 
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.
    A.S. Acampora and S.I.A. Shah. Multihop lightwave networks: a comparison of store-and-forward and hot-potato routing. In INFOCOM, pages 10–19. IEEE, 1991.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. Bar-Noy, P. Raghavan, B. Schieber, and H. Tamaki. Fast deflection routing for packets and worms. In Proceedings 12th Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pages 75–86. ACM, 1993.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. Baran. On distributed communications networks. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 12:1–9, 1964.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    I. Ben-Aroya, I. Newman, and A. Schuster. Randomized single target hot potato routing. To appear in J. of Algorithms, 1996. (Also in Proceedings of the 3rd Israeli Symposium on Theory of Computing and Systems, January 1995, pages 20–29).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    I. Ben-Aroya, E. Tamar, and A. Schuster. Greedy hot-potato routing on the two-dimensional mesh. Distributed computing, 9(1):3–19, 1995. (Also in Proceedings of the 2nd European Symposium on Algorithms, Utrecht, 1994).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. Ben-Dor, S. Halevi, and A. Schuster. Potential function analysis of greedy hotpotato routing. In Proceedings of the 13th Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pages 225–234, Los Angeles, August 1994. ACM. (Also Technion/LPCR TR #9303, January 1993.).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Borodin and J.E. Hopcroft. Routing, merging, and sorting on parallel models of computation. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 30:130–145, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Borodin, Y. Rabani, and B. Schieber. Deterministic many-to-many hot potato routing. Technical Report RC 20107, IBM Watson Research Report, 1995.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J.T. Brassil and R.L. Cruz. Bounds on maximum delay in networks with deflection routing. In Proceedings of the 29th Allerton Conference on Communication, Control and Computing, pages 571–580, 1991.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    D.D. Chinn, T. Leighton, and M. Tompa. Minimal adaptive routing on the mesh with bounded queue size. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 34(2):154–170, 1996. Preliminary version in Proceedings of the 6th Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures, June 1994, pages 354–363.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    U. Feige. Observations on hot potato routing. In Proceedings of the 3rd Israeli Symposium on Theory of Computing and Systems, pages 30–39, January 1995.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    U. Feige and P. Raghavan. Exact analysis of hot-potato routing. In Proceedings of the 33rd Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 553–562. IEEE, November 1992.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A.G. Greenberg and J. Goodman. Sharp approximate models of adaptive routing in mesh networks. In O.J. Boxma, J.W. Cohen, and H.C. Tijms, editors, Teletraffic Analysis and Computer Performance Evaluation, pages 255–270. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1986.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    A.G. Greenberg and B. Hajek. Deflection routing in hypercube networks. IEEE Transactions on Communications, June 1992.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    B. Hajek. Bounds on evacuation time for deflection routing. Distributed Computing, 5:1–6, 1991.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    C. Kaklamanis, D. Krizanc, and Satish Rao. Hot-potato routing on processor arrays. In Proceedings of the 5th Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures, pages 273–282. ACM, 1993.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. Kaufmann, H. Lauer, and H. Schröder. Fast deterministic hot-potato routing on meshes. In Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Algorithms and Computation (ISAAC), volume 834 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 333–341. Springer-Verlag, 1994.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    D.H. Lawrie and D.A. Padua. Analysis of message switching with shuffle-exchanges in multi-processors. Workshop on Interconnection Networks for Parallel and Distributed Computing, pages 116–123, 1980.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    N.F. Maxemchuk. Comparison of deflection and store and forward techniques in the manhattan street and shuffle exchange networks. In IEEE INFOCOM, pages 800–809, 1989.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    I. Newman and A. Schuster. Hot-potato algorithms for permutation routing. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 6(11):1168–1176, November 1995.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    J.Y. Ngai and C.L. Seitz. A framework for adaptive routing in multicomputer networks. In Proceedings of the 1st Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures, pages 1–9. ACM, 1989.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    T. Szymanski. An analysis of hot potato routing in a fiber optic packet switched hypercube. In IEEE INFOCOM, pages 918–926, 1990.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    L.G. Valiant. Optimality of a two-phase strategy for routing in interconnection networks. IEEE Transactions on Computers, C-32(9), September 1983.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Z. Zhang and A.S. Acampora. Performance analysis of multihop lightwave networks with hot potato routing and distance age priorities. In IEEE INFOCOM, pages 1012–1021, 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ishai Ben-Aroya
    • 1
  • Donald D. Chinn
    • 2
    Email author
  • Assaf Schuster
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceTechnionHaifaIsrael
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity of WashingtonSeattle

Personalised recommendations