International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET)

Volume 11, Issue 10, October 2020, pp. 2071-2080, Article ID: IJARET_11_10_199
Available online at https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJARET?Volume=11&Issue=10
ISSN Print: 0976-6480 and ISSN Online: 0976-6499
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/6XD48

© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

A PROFICIENT MINIMUM-ROUTINE
RELIABLE RECOVERY LINE ACCUMULATION
SCHEME FOR NON-DETERMINISTIC MOBILE
DISTRIBUTED FRAMEWORKS
Asrar Ahmad Ansari
Research Scholar, CS, NIMS University, Rajasthan, Jaipur, India

Surendra Pal Singh

Professor, CSE, NIMS University, Rajasthan, Jaipur, India

ABSTRACT
We propose a least-routine orchestrated Reliable Recovery Line Accumulation
arrangement for non-deterministic nomadic distributed frameworks, where no
ineffectual restoration-spots are registered. An effort has been made to curtail the
filibustering of routines and synchronization communiqué expenses. We capture the
partial transitive causal-interrelationships during the normal accomplishment by
piggybacking causal-interrelationship vectors onto reckoning communiqués. Frequent
terminations of Reliable Recovery Line Accumulation arrangement may happen in
nomadic frameworks due to exhausted battery, non-voluntary disengagements of Mobl-
Nodules, or poor cellular connectivity. Therefore, we propose that in the first stage, all
pertinent Mobl-Nodules will register interim restoration-spot only. Ad hoc restoration-
spot is stored on the memory of Mobl-Nodule only. In this case, if some routine fails to
register restoration-spot in the first stage, then Mobl-Nodules need to call off their
interim restoration-spots only. In this way, we try to curtail the forfeiture of Reliable
Recovery Line Accumulation work when any routine fails to register its restoration-spot
in harmonization with others.
Key words: Fault tolerance, consistent global state, coordinated Reliable Recovery
Line Accumulation and mobile frameworks.
Cite this Article: Asrar Ahmad Ansari and Surendra Pal Singh, A Proficient Minimum-
Routine Reliable Recovery Line Accumulation Scheme for Non-Deterministic Mobile
Distributed Frameworks, International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering
and Technology (IJARET), 11(10), 2020, pp. 2071-2080.
https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJARET?Volume=11&Issue=10

https://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 2071 editor@iaeme.com

 A Proficient Minimum-Routine Reliable Recovery Line Accumulation Scheme for Non-Deterministic
Mobile Distributed Frameworks

1. INTRODUCTION
A distributed framework is one that runs on a collection of machines that do not have shared
memory, yet looks to its users like a single computer. The term Distributed frameworks is used
to describe a framework with the following characteristics: i) it consists of several computers
that do not share memory or a clock, ii) the computers communicate with each other by
exchanging reckoning-communications over a communication network, iii) each computer has
its own memory and runs its own operating framework. A distributed framework consists of a
finite set of routines and a finite set of channels.
In the mobile distributed framework, some of the routines are running on mobile hosts
(Mob_Nodes). A Mob_Node communicates with other nodes of the framework via a special
node called mobile support station (Mob_Supp_St) [1]. A cell is a geographical area around a
Mob_Supp_St in which it can support an Mob_Node. A Mob_Node can change its geographical
position freely from one cell to another or even to an area covered by no cell. An Mob_Supp_St
can have both wired and wireless links and acts as an interface between the static network and
a part of the mobile network. Static network connects all Mob_Supp_Sts. A static node that has
no support to Mob_Node can be considered as a Mob_Supp_St with no Mob_Node.
Checkpoint is defined as a designated place in a program at which normal routine is
interrupted specifically to preserve the status information necessary to allow resumption of
processing at a later time. RRL-accumulation (Reliable Recovery Line Accumulation) is the
routine of saving the status information. By periodically invoking the RRL-accumulation
routine, one can save the status of a program at regular intervals. If there is a failure one may
restart reckoning from the last retrieval-marks thereby avoiding repeating reckoning from the
beginning. The routine of resuming reckoning by rolling back to a saved state is called rollback
recovery. The retrieval-mark-restart is one of the well-known methods to realize reliable
distributed frameworks. Each routine takes a retrieval-mark where the local state information
is stored in the stable storage. Rolling back an routine and again resuming its execution from a
prior state involves overhead and delays the overall completion of the routine, it is needed to
make an routine rollback to a most recent possible state. So it is at the desire of the user for
taking many retrieval-marks over the whole life of the execution of the routine [6, 29, 30, 31].
In a distributed framework, since the routines in the framework do not share memory, a
global state of the framework is defined as a set of local states, one from each routine. The state
of channels corresponding to a global state is the set of reckoning-communications sent but not
yet received. A global state is said to be “consistent” if it contains no orphan reckoning-
communication; i.e., a reckoning-communication whose receive event is recorded, but its send
event is lost. To recover from a failure, the framework restarts its execution from a previous
consistent global state saved on the stable storage during fault-free execution. This saves all the
reckoning done up to the last retrieval-marked state and only the reckoning done thereafter
needs to be redone. In distributed frameworks, RRL-accumulation can be independent,
coordinated [6, 11, 13] or quasi-synchronous [2]. Message Logging is also used for fault
tolerance in distributed frameworks [22, 29, 30, 31].
In coordinated or synchronous RRL-accumulation, routines take retrieval-marks in such a
manner that the resulting global state is consistent. Mostly it follows two-phase commit
structure [6, 11, 23]. In the first phase, routines take partially-committed retrieval-marks and in
the second phase, these are made enduring. The main advantage is that only one enduring
retrieval-mark and at most one partially-committed retrieval-mark is required to be stored. In
the case of a fault, routines rollback to last retrieval-marked state.
The coordinated RRL-accumulation protocols can be classified into two types: filibustering
and non-filibustering. In filibustering algorithms, some filibustering of routines takes place

https://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 2072 editor@iaeme.com

 Asrar Ahmad Ansari and Surendra Pal Singh

during RRL-accumulation [4, 11, 24, 25] In non-filibustering algorithms, no filibustering of

routines is required for RRL-accumulation[5, 12, 15, 21]. The coordinated RRL-accumulation
algorithms can also be classified into following two categories: minimum-routine and all
routine algorithms. In all-routine coordinated RRL-accumulation algorithms, every routine is
required to take its retrieval-mark in an initiation [6], [8]. In minimum-routine algorithms,
minimum interacting routines are required to take their retrieval-marks in an initiation [11].
In minimum-routine coordinated RRL-accumulation algorithms, an routine Pi takes its
retrieval-mark only if it a member of the minimum set (a subset of interacting routine). An
routine Pi is in the minimum set only if the retrieval-mark initiator routine is transitively
dependent upon it. Pj is directly dependent upon Pk only if there exists m such that Pj receives
m from Pk in the current RRL-accumulation interval [CI] and Pk has not taken its enduring
retrieval-mark after sending m. The ith CI of an routine denotes all the reckoning performed
between its ith and (i+1)th retrieval-mark, including the ith retrieval-mark but not the (i+1)th
retrieval-mark.
In minimum-routine RRL-accumulation protocols, some useless retrieval-marks are taken
or filibustering of routines takes place. In this paper, we propose a minimum-routine
coordinated RRL-accumulation algorithm for non-deterministic mobile distributed
frameworks, where no useless retrieval-marks are taken. An effort has been made to minimize
the filibustering of routines and the loss of RRL-accumulation effort when any routine fails to
take its retrieval-mark in coordination with others.
Rao and Naidu [26] proposed a new coordinated RRL-accumulation protocol combined
with selective sender-based reckoning-communication logging. The protocol is free from the
problem of lost reckoning-communications. The term ‘selective’ implies that reckoning-
communications are logged only within a specified interval known as active interval, thereby
reducing reckoning-communication logging overhead. All routines take retrieval-marks at the
end of their respective active intervals forming a consistent global retrieval-mark. Biswas &
Neogy [27] proposed a RRL-accumulation and failure recovery algorithm where mobile hosts
save retrieval-marks based on mobility and movement patterns. Mobile hosts save retrieval-
marks when number of hand-offs exceed a predefined handoff threshold value. Neves & Fuchs
[18] designed a time based loosely synchronized coordinated RRL-accumulation protocol that
removes the overhead of synchronization and piggybacks integer csn (retrieval-mark sequence
number). Gao et al [28] developed an index-based algorithm which uses time-coordination for
consistently RRL-accumulation in mobile computing environments. In time-based RRL-
accumulation protocols, there is no need to send extra coordination reckoning-communications.
However, they have to deal with the synchronization of timers. This class of protocols suits to
the applications where routines have high reckoning-communication sending rate.

2. BASIC IDEA
All Communications to and from Mobl-Nodule pass through its proximate Mobl_Supp_St. The
Mobl_Supp_St maintains the causal-interrelationship information of the Mobl-Nodules which
are in its cell. The causal-interrelationship information is kept in Boolean vector Ri for routine
Pi. The vector has n bits for n routines. When Ri[j] is set to 1, it represents Pi depends upon Pj.
For every Pi, Ri is initialized to 0 except Ri[i], which is initialized to l. When a routine Pi running
on a Mobl-Nodule, say Mobl-Nodulep, accepts a communiqué from a routine Pj, Mobl-
Nodulep's proximate Mobl_Supp_St should set Ri[j] to 1.If Pj has registered its committed
restoration-spot after consigning m, Ri[j] is not updated.
Suppose there are routines Pi and Pj running on Mobl-Nodules, Mobl-Nodulei and Mobl-
Nodulej with causal-interrelationship vectors Ri and Rj. The causal-interrelationship vectors of
Mobl-Nodules, Mobl-Nodulei and Mobl-Nodulej are maintained by their proximate

https://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 2073 editor@iaeme.com

 A Proficient Minimum-Routine Reliable Recovery Line Accumulation Scheme for Non-Deterministic
Mobile Distributed Frameworks

Mobl_Supp_Sts, Mobl_Supp_Sti and Mobl_Supp_Stj. Process Pi running on Mobl-Nodulei

consigns communiqué m to routine Pj running on Mobl-Nodulej. The communiqué is first
consigned to Mobl_Supp_Sti (proximate Mobl_Supp_St of Mobl-Nodulei). Mobl_Supp_Sti
maintains the causal-interrelationship vector Ri of Mobl-Nodulei. Mobl_Supp_Sti appends Ri
with communiqué m and consigns it to Mobl_Supp_Stj (proximate Mobl_Supp_St of Mobl-
Nodulej). Mobl_Supp_Stj maintains the causal-interrelationship vector Rj of Mobl-Nodulej.
Mobl_Supp_Stj replaces Rj with bitwise logical OR of causal-interrelationship vectors Ri and
Rj and consigns m to Pj.

Figure 1 Maintenance of Dependency Vectors

In Fig 1, there are five routines P1, P2, P3, P4, P5 with causal-interrelationship vectors R1,
R2, R3, R4, R5 initialized to 00001, 00010, 00100, 01000, and 10000 respectively. Initially,
every routine depends upon itself. Now routine P1 consigns m to P2. P1 appends R1 with m. P2
replaces R2 with the bitwise logical OR of R1(00001) and R2(00010), which comes out to be
(00011). Now P2 consigns m2 to P3 and appends R2 (00011) with m2. Before acquiring m2, the
value of R3 at P3 was 00100. After acquiring m2, P3 replaces R3 with the bitwise logical OR of
R2 (00011) and R3 (00100) and R3 becomes (00111). Now P4 consigns m3 along with R4 (01000)
to P5. After acquiring m3, R5 becomes (11000). In this case, if P3 starts RRL-accumulation at t1,
it will compute the partially-committed least set equivalent to R3(00111), which comes out to
be {P1, P2, P3}. In this way, partial transitive causal-interrelationships are captured during
normal reckonings.
In orchestrated RRL-accumulation, if a single routine fails to register its restoration-spot;
all the RRL-accumulation work goes waste, because, each routine has to call off its partially-
committed restoration-spot. Furthermore, in order to register the partially-committed
restoration-spot, a Mobl-Nodule needs to transfer large restoration-spot data to its proximate
Mobl_Supp_St over cellular channels. Hence, the forfeiture of RRL-accumulation work may
be exceedingly high due to frequent terminations of RRL-accumulation strategies especially in
nomadic frameworks. In nomadic distributed frameworks, there remain certain concerns like:
abrupt cessation, exhausted battery power, or letdown in cellular bandwidth. So there remains
a good probability that some Mobl-Nodule may fail to register its restoration-spot in
harmonization with others. Therefore, we propose that in the first stage, all routines in the least
set, register interim restoration-spot only. Ad hoc restoration-spot is stored on the memory of
Mobl-Nodule only. If some routine fails to register its restoration-spot in the first stage, then
other Mobl-Nodules need to call off their interim restoration-spots only. The work of taking an
interim restoration-spot is negligible as compared to the partially-committed one. In other
strategies, all pertinent routines need to call off their partially-committed restoration-spots in
this situation. Hence the forfeiture of RRL-accumulation work in case of an call off of the RRL-

https://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 2074 editor@iaeme.com

 Asrar Ahmad Ansari and Surendra Pal Singh

accumulation arrangement is dramatically low in the proposed scheme as compared to other

orchestrated RRL-accumulation schemes for nomadic distributed frameworks.
In this second stage, a routine converts its interim restoration-spot into partially-committed
one. By using this scheme, we try to curtail the forfeiture of RRL-accumulation work in case
of call off of RRL-accumulation arrangement in the first stage.
A non-filibustering RRL-accumulation arrangement does not require any routine to suspend
its underlying reckoning. When routines do not suspend their reckoning, it is possible for a
routine to accept a reckoning communiqué from another routine, which is already running in a
new RRL-accumulation interval. If this situation is not properly dealt with, it may result in an
inconsistency. During the RRL-accumulation arrangement, a routine Pi may accept m from Pj
such that Pj has registered its restoration-spot for the current instigation whereas Pi has not.
Suppose, Pi routines m, and it accepts restoration-spot appeal later on, and then it registers its
restoration-spot. In that case, m will become orphan in the registered comprehensive status. We
propose that only those communiqués, which can become orphan, should be buffered at the
consigner’s end. When a routine registers its interim restoration-spot, it is not allowed to
consign any communiqué till it accepts the partially-committed restoration-spot appeal.
However, in this duration, the routine is allowed to perform its normal reckonings and accept
the communiqués. When a routine accepts the partially-committed restoration-spot appeal, it is
confirmed that every pertinent routine has registered its interim restoration-spot. Hence, a
communiqué generated for consigning by a routine after getting partially-committed
restoration-spot appeal cannot become orphan. Hence, a routine can consign the buffered
communiqués after getting the partially-committed restoration-spot appeal from the
inaugurator.

3. THE PROPOSED ORCHESTRATED RRL-ACCUMULATION

ARRANGEMENT
3.1. First Phase of the Arrangement
When a routine, say Pi, running on a Mobl-Nodule, say Mobl-Nodulei, triggers a RRL-
accumulation, it consigns a restoration-spot instigation appeal to its proximate Mobl_Supp_St,
which will be the proxy Mobl_Supp_St (if the inaugurator runs on an Mobl_Supp_St, then the
Mobl_Supp_St is the proxy Mobl_Supp_St). The proxy Mobl_Supp_St maintains the causal-
interrelationship vector of Pi say Ri. On the basis of Ri, the set of dependent routines of Pi is
formed, say Sminset. The proxy Mobl_Supp_St broadcasts ckpt (Sminset) to all Mobl_Supp_Sts.
When an Mobl_Supp_St accept ckpt (Sminset) communiqué, it checks, if any routines in Sminset
are in its cell. If so, the Mobl_Supp_St consigns interim restoration-spot appeal communiqué
to them. Any routine acquiring a interim restoration-spot appeal registers a interim restoration-
spot and consigns a response to its proximate Mobl_Supp_St. After an Mobl_Supp_St
acknowledged all response communiqués from the routines to which it consigned interim
restoration-spot appeal communiqués, it consigns a response to the proxy Mobl_Supp_St. It
should be noted that in the first stage, all routines register the interim restoration-spots. For a
routine running on a static host, interim restoration-spot is equivalent to partially-committed
restoration-spot. But, for a Mobl-Nodule, interim restoration-spot is divergent from partially-
committed restoration-spot. In order to register a partially-committed restoration-spot, a Mobl-
Nodule has to record its proximate status and has to transfer it to its proximate Mobl_Supp_St.
But, the interim restoration-spot is stored on the proximate disk of the Mobl-Nodule. It should
be noted that the work of taking a interim restoration-spot is very small as compared to the
partially-committed one. For a disconnected Mobl-Nodule that is a member of least set, the
Mobl_Supp_St that has its disconnected restoration-spot, considers its disconnected
restoration-spot as the required come.

https://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 2075 editor@iaeme.com

 A Proficient Minimum-Routine Reliable Recovery Line Accumulation Scheme for Non-Deterministic
Mobile Distributed Frameworks

3.2. Second Phase of the Arrangement

After the proxy Mobl_Supp_St has acknowledged the response from every Mobl_Supp_St, the
arrangement enters the second stage. If the proxy Mobl_Supp_St learns that all applicable
routines have registered their interim restoration-spots successfully, it directs them to convert
their interim restoration-spots into partially-committed ones and also consigns the exact least
set along with this appeal. Alternatively, if inaugurator Mobl_Supp_St comes to know that
some routine has failed to register its restoration-spot in the first stage, it concerns call off
appeal to all Mobl_Supp_St. In this way the Mobl-Nodules need to call off only the interim
restoration-spots, and not the partially-committed ones. In this way we try to reduce the
forfeiture of RRL-accumulation work in case of call off of RRL-accumulation arrangement in
first stage.
When an Mobl_Supp_St accepts the partially-committed restoration-spot appeal, it directs
all the routine in the least set, which are also running in itself, to convert their interim
restoration-spots into partially-committed ones. When an Mobl_Supp_St learns that all
applicable routine in its cell have registered their partially-committed restoration-spots
successfully, it consigns response to proxy Mobl_Supp_St. If any Mobl-Nodule fails to transfer
its restoration-spot data to its proximate Mobl_Supp_St, then the letdown response is consigned
to the proxy Mobl_Supp_St; which in turn, concerns the call off communiqué.

3.3. Third Phase of the Arrangement

Finally, when the proxy Mobl_Supp_St learns that all routines in the least set have registered
their partially-committed restoration-spots successfully, it concerns commit appeal to all
Mobl_Supp_Sts. When a routine in the least set gets the commit appeal, it converts its partially-
committed restoration-spot into committed one and discards its earlier committed restoration-
spot, if any.

3.4. Massage Handling during RRL-Accumulation

When a routine registers its interim restoration-spot, it does not consign any massage till it
accepts the partially-committed restoration-spot appeal. This time duration of a routine is called
its uncertainty period. Suppose, Pi consigns m to Pj after taking its interim restoration-spot and
Pj has not registered its interim restoration-spot at the time of acquiring m. In this case, if Pj
registers its interim restoration-spot after working m, then m will become orphan. Therefore,
we do not allow Pi to consign any massage unless and until every routine in the least set have
registered its interim restoration-spot in the first stage. Pi can consign massages when it accepts
the partially-committed restoration-spot appeal; because, at this moment every pertinent routine
has registered its interim restoration-spot and m cannot become orphan. The massages to be
consigned are buffered at consigners end. In this duration, a routine is allowed to continue its
normal reckonings and accept massages.
Suppose, Pj gets the interim restoration-spot appeal at Mobl_Supp_Stp. Now, we find any
routine Pk such that Pk does not belong to Sminset and Pk belongs to Rj[]. In this case, Pk is also
included in the least set; and Pj consigns interim restoration-spot appeal to Pk. It should be noted
that the Sminset, computed on the basis of causal-interrelationship vector of inaugurator routine
is only a subset of the least set. Due to zigzag causal-interrelationships, inaugurator routine may
be transitively dependent upon some more routines which are not included in the Sminset
computed initially.

https://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 2076 editor@iaeme.com

 Asrar Ahmad Ansari and Surendra Pal Singh

4. AN EXAMPLE OF THE PROPOSED PROTOCOL

The proposed arrangement can be better understood by the example shown in Fig 2. There are
six routines (P0 to P5) denoted by straight lines. Each routine is assumed to have initial
committed restoration-spots with chkpt_seq_no equal to “0”. Cix denotes the xth restoration-
spots of Pi. Initial causal-interrelationship vectors of P0, P1, P2, P3, P4, P5 are [000001], [000010]
[000100], [001000], [010000], and [100000], respectively. The causal-interrelationship vectors
are maintained as explained in Section 3.3.
P0 consigns m2 to P1 along with its causal-interrelationship vector [000001]. When P1
accepts m2, it computes its causal-interrelationship vector by taking bitwise logical OR of
causal-interrelationship vectors of P0 and P1, which comes out to be [000011]. Similarly, P2
updates its causal-interrelationship vector on acquiring m3 and it comes out to be [000111]. At
time t1, P2 triggers RRL-accumulation arrangement with its causal-interrelationship vector is
[000111]. At time t1, P2 finds that it is transitively dependent upon P0 and P1. Therefore, P2
computes the partially-committed least set [Sminset= {P0, P1, P2}]. P2 consigns the interim
restoration-spot appeal to P1 and P0 and registers its own interim restoration-spot C21. For a
Mobl-Nodule the interim restoration-spot is stored on the disk of Mobl-Nodule. It should be
noted that Sminset is only a subset of the least set. When P1 registers its interim restoration-spot
C11, it finds that it is dependent upon P3 due to m4, but P3 is not a member of Sminset; therefore,
P1 consigns interim restoration-spot appeal to P3. Consequently, P3 registers its interim
restoration-spot C31.
After taking its interim restoration-spot C21, P2 generates m8 for P3. As P2 has already
registered its interim restoration-spot for the current instigation and it has not acknowledged
the partially-committed restoration-spot appeal from the inaugurator; therefore P2 buffers m8
on its proximate disk. We define this duration as the uncertainty period of a routine during
which a routine is not allowed to consign any massage. The massages generated for consigning
are buffered at the proximate disk of the consigner’s routine. P2 can consign m8 only after
getting partially-committed restoration-spot appeal or call off massages from the inaugurator
routine. Similarly, after taking its interim restoration-spot P0 buffers m10 for its uncertainty
period. It should be noted that P1 accepts m10 only after taking its interim restoration-spot.
Similarly, P3 accepts m8 only after taking its interim restoration-spot C31.A routine is allowed
to accept all the massages during its uncertainty period; for example, P3 accepts m11. A routine
is also allowed to perform its normal reckonings during its uncertainty period.
At time t2, P2 accepts responses to interim restoration-spots appeals from all routine in the
least set (not shown in the Figure 2) and finds that they have registered their interim restoration-
spots successfully; therefore, P2 concerns partially-committed restoration-spot appeal to all
routines. On getting partially-committed restoration-spot appeal, routines in the least set [ P0,
P1, P2, P3 ] convert their interim restoration-spots into partially-committed ones and consign the
response to inaugurator routine P2; these routine also consign the massages, buffered at their
proximate disks, to the destination routines For example, P0 consigns m10 to P1 after getting
partially-committed restoration-spot appeal [not shown in the figure]. Similarly, P2 consigns m8
to P3 after getting partially-committed restoration-spot appeal. At time t3, P2 accepts responses
from the routine in least set [not shown in the figure] and finds that they have registered their
partially-committed restoration-spots successfully; therefore, P2 concerns commit appeal to all
routine. A routine in the least set converts its partially-committed restoration-spot into
committed restoration-spot and discards it old committed restoration-spot if any.

https://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 2077 editor@iaeme.com

 A Proficient Minimum-Routine Reliable Recovery Line Accumulation Scheme for Non-Deterministic
Mobile Distributed Frameworks

Figure 2 An Example of the Proposed Protocol

5. CONCLUSION
We have designed a least-interacting-routine synchronous RRL-accumulation mechanism for
mobile distributed framework. We try to minimize the filibustering of routines during RRL-
accumulation. The filibustering time of an routine is bare least. During filibustering period,
routines can do their normal working outs, consign reckoning-communications and can routine
selective reckoning-communications. The number of routines that seize restoration-spots is
minimized to avoid awakening of Mobl-Nodules in doze mode of routine and thrashing of
Mobl-Nodules with RRL-accumulation activity. It also saves limited battery life of Mobl-
Nodules and low bandwidth of wireless channels. We try to reduce the loss of RRL-
accumulation effort when any routine miscarries to seize its restoration-spot in synchronization
with others. We also try to minimize the synchronization reckoning-communications during
RRL-accumulation. In the planned scheme, no synchronization reckoning-communications are
sent in order to enter the second or third phase of the mechanism.

REFERENCES
[1] A. Acharya and B. R. Badrinath, Checkpointing Distributed Applications on Mobile Computers,
In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Information
Systems (PDIS 1994), 1994, 73-80.
[2] R. Baldoni, J-M Hélary, A. Mostefaoui and M. Raynal, “A Communication-Induced
Checkpointing Protocol that Ensures Rollback-Dependency Tractability”, In Proceedings of the
International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant-Computing Systems, 1997, 68-77.
[3] G. Cao and M. Singhal, “On coordinated checkpointing in Distributed Systems”, IEEE
Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 9 (12), 1998, 1213-1225.

https://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 2078 editor@iaeme.com

 Asrar Ahmad Ansari and Surendra Pal Singh

[4] G. Cao and M. Singhal, “On the Impossibility of Min-process Non-blocking Checkpointing and
an Efficient Checkpointing Algorithm for Mobile Computing Systems,” In Proceedings of
International Conference on Parallel Processing, 1998, 37-44.
[5] G. Cao and M. Singhal, “Mutable Checkpoints: A New Checkpointing Approach for Mobile
Computing systems”, IEEE Transaction On Parallel and Distributed Systems, 12(2), 2001, 157-
172.
[6] K.M. Chandy and L. Lamport, “Distributed Snapshots: Determining Global State of Distributed
Systems,” ACM Transaction on Computing Systems, 3(1), 1985, 63-75.
[7] E. N. Elnozahy, L. Alvisi, Y. M. Wang and D. B. Johnson, “A Survey of Rollback-Recovery
Protocols in Message-Passing Systems,” ACM Computing Surveys, 34(3), 2002, 375-408.
[8] E.N. Elnozahy, D.B. Johnson and W. Zwaenepoel, “The Performance of Consistent
Checkpointing”, In Proceedings of the 11th Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems, 1992,
39-47.
[9] J.M. Hélary, A. Mostefaoui and M. Raynal, “Communication-Induced Determination of
Consistent Snapshots”, In Proceedings of the 28th International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant
Computing, 1998, 208-217.
[10] H. Higaki and M. Takizawa, “Checkpoint-recovery Protocol for Reliable Mobile Systems”,
Transactions of Information processing Japan, 40(1), 1999, 236-244.
[11] R. Koo and S. Toueg, “Checkpointing and Roll-Back Recovery for Distributed Systems”, IEEE
Transactions on Software Engineering, 13(1), 1987, 23-31.
[12] P. Kumar, L. Kumar, R. K. Chauhan and V. K. Gupta, “A Non-Intrusive Minimum Process
Synchronous Checkpointing Protocol for Mobile Distributed Systems”, In Proceedings of IEEE
ICPWC-2005, 2005.
[13] J.L. Kim and T. Park, “An efficient Protocol for checkpointing Recovery in Distributed
Systems”, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 1993, 955-960.
[14] L. Kumar, M. Misra, R.C. Joshi, “Checkpointing in Distributed Computing Systems”, In
Concurrency in Dependable Computing, 2002, 273-92.
[15] L. Kumar, M. Misra, R.C. Joshi, “Low overhead optimal checkpointing for mobile distributed
systems”, In Proceedings of 19th IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering, 2003,
686 – 88.
[16] L. Kumar and P.Kumar, “A Synchronous Checkpointing Protocol for Mobile Distributed
Systems: Probabilistic Approach”, International Journal of Information and Computer
Security, 1(3), 2007, 298-314.
[17] L. Lamport, “Time, clocks and ordering of events in a distributed system”, Communications of
the ACM, 21(7), 1978, 558-565.
[18] N. Neves and W.K. Fuchs, “Adaptive Recovery for Mobile Environments”, Communications
of the ACM, 40(1), 1997, 68-74.
[19] W. Ni, S. Vrbsky and S. Ray, “Pitfalls in Distributed Nonblocking Checkpointing”, Journal of
Interconnection Networks, 1(5), 2004, 47-78.
[20] D.K. Pradhan, P.P. Krishana and N.H. Vaidya, “Recovery in Mobile Wireless Environment:
Design and Trade-off Analysis”, In Proceedings of 26th International Symposium on Fault-
Tolerant Computing, 1996, 16-25.
[21] R. Prakash and M. Singhal, “Low-Cost Checkpointing and Failure Recovery in Mobile
Computing Systems”, IEEE Transaction On Parallel and Distributed Systems, 7(10), 1996,
1035-1048.

https://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 2079 editor@iaeme.com

 A Proficient Minimum-Routine Reliable Recovery Line Accumulation Scheme for Non-Deterministic
Mobile Distributed Frameworks

[22] K.F. Ssu, B. Yao, W.K. Fuchs and N.F. Neves, “Adaptive Checkpointing with Storage
Management for Mobile Environments”, IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 48(4), 1999, 315-
324.
[23] L.M. Silva and J.G. Silva, “Global checkpointing for distributed programs”, In Proceedings of
the 11th symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems, 1992, 155-62.
[24] Sunil Kumar, R K Chauhan, Parveen Kumar, “A Minimum-process Coordinated Checkpointing
Protocol for Mobile Computing Systems”, International Journal of Foundations of Computer
science, vol 19, no. 4, pp 1015-1038, 2008.
[25] Parveen Kumar, “A Low-Cost Hybrid Coordinated Checkpointing Protocol for mobile
distributed systems”, Mobile Information Systems. pp 13-32, vol. 4, no. 1, 2007.
[26] Rao, S., & Naidu, M.M, “A New, Efficient Coordinated Checkpointing Protocol Combined with
Selective Sender-Based Message Logging”, IEEE/ACS International Conference on Computer
Systems and Applications, 2008.
[27] Biswas S, & Neogy S,“A Mobility-Based Checkpointing Protocol for Mobile Computing
System”, International Journal of Computer Science & Information Technology, vol.2, no.1,
pp135-15,2010.
[28] Gao Y., Deng C., & Che, Y.,“ An Adaptive Index-Based Algorithm Using Time-Coordination
in Mobile Computing”, International Symposiums on Information Processing, pp.578-585,
2008.
[29] Praveen Choudhary, Parveen Kumar, “Minimum-Process Global-Snapshot Accumulation
Etiquette for Mobile Distributed Systems”, International Journal of Advanced Research in
Engineering and Technology, vol. 11, Issue 8, Aug 20, pp.937-948.
[30] Praveen Choudhary, Parveen Kumar, ”Low-Overhead Minimum-Method Global-Snapshot
Compilation Protocol for Deterministic Mobile Computing Systems”, International Journal of
Emerging Trends in Engineering Research” vol. 9, Issue 8, Aug 2021, pp.1069-1072

https://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 2080 editor@iaeme.com