Is it possible to implement either a reliable or an unreliable (process) failure detector using an
unreliable communication channel?
What will be an ideal response?
An unreliable failure detector can be constructed from an unreliable channel – all that changes from use of a
reliable channel is that dropped messages may increase the number of false suspicions of process failure.
A reliable failure detector requires a synchronous system. It cannot be built on an unreliable channel since a
dropped message and a failed process cannot be distinguished – unless the unreliability of the channel can be
masked while providing a guaranteed upper bound on message delivery times. A channel that dropped
messages with some probability but, say, guaranteed that at least one message in a hundred was not dropped
could, in principle, be used to create a reliable failure detector.
You might also like to view...
Inner classes available outside the scope of their outer class are modified by the keyword:
(a) Public (b) Private (c) Protected (d) Package access
In C#, arithmetic expressions must be written in form.
a) straight-line b) top-bottom c) left-right d) right-left
What is another word for shareware?
A. Trialware B. Freeware C. Commercial software D. Software piracy
____________________ are search words associated with a clip and are part of the clip's properties.
Fill in the blank(s) with the appropriate word(s).