Article

Permissiveness in Transactional Memories

Authors:

Rachid Guerraoui,

Thomas A. Henzinger,

Vasu SinghAuthors Info & Claims

DISC '08: Proceedings of the 22nd international symposium on Distributed Computing

Pages 305 - 319

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87779-0_21

Published: 22 September 2008 Publication History

Abstract

We introduce the notion of permissiveness in transactional memories (TM). Intuitively, a TM is permissive if it never aborts a transaction when it need not. More specifically, a TM is permissive with respect to a safety property <em>p</em>if the TM accepts every history that satisfies <em>p</em>. Permissiveness, like safety and liveness, can be used as a metric to compare TMs. We illustrate that it is impractical to achieve permissiveness deterministically, and then show how randomization can be used to achieve permissiveness efficiently. We introduce Adaptive Validation STM (AVSTM), which is probabilistically permissive with respect to opacity; that is, every opaque history is accepted by AVSTM with positive probability. Moreover, AVSTM guarantees lock freedom. Owing to its permissiveness, AVSTM outperforms other STMs by up to 40% in read dominated workloads in high contention scenarios. But, in low contention scenarios, the book-keeping done by AVSTM to achieve permissiveness makes AVSTM, on average, 20-30% worse than existing STMs.

References

[1]

Dice, D., Shalev, O., Shavit, N.: Transactional locking ii. In: DISC, pp. 194-208. Springer, Heidelberg (2006).

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[2]

Fraser, K.: Practical Lock Freedom. PhD thesis, Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge (2003).

Google Scholar

[3]

Fraser, K., Harris, T.: Concurrent programming without locks. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. (2007).

Crossref

Google Scholar

[4]

Guerraoui, R., Henzinger, T.A., Jobstmann, B., Singh, V.: Model checking transactional memories. In: PLDI, pp. 372-382. ACM Press, New York (2008).

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[5]

Guerraoui, R., Henzinger, T.A., Singh, V.: Nondeterminism and completeness in transactional memories. In: CONCUR. Springer, Heidelberg (2008).

Google Scholar

[6]

Guerraoui, R., Herlihy, M., Kapałka, M., Pochon, B.: Robust contention management in software transactional memory. In: SCOOL (October 2005).

Google Scholar

[7]

Guerraoui, R., Kapałka, M.: On the correctness of transactional memory. In: PPoPP. ACM Press, New York (2008).

Crossref

Google Scholar

[8]

Harris, T., Fraser, K.: Language support for lightweight transactions. In: OOPSLA, pp. 388-402 (2003).

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[9]

Herlihy, M., Luchangco, V., Moir, M., Scherer, W.N.: Software transactional memory for dynamic-sized data structures. In: PODC, pp. 92-101. ACM Press, New York (2003).

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[10]

Papadimitriou, C.H.: The serializability of concurrent database updates. J. ACM, 631-653 (1979).

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[11]

Riegel, T., Felber, P., Fetzer, C.: A lazy snapshot algorithm with eager validation. In: DISC, pp. 284-298. Springer, Heidelberg (2006).

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[12]

Scherer, W.N., Scott, M.L.: Advanced contention management for dynamic software transactional memory. In: PODC, pp. 240-248. ACM Press, New York (2005).

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[13]

Scott, M.L.: Sequential specification of transactional memory semantics. In: ACM SIGPLAN WTC (2006).

Google Scholar

Cited By

View all

Zeng JIssa SRomano PRodrigues LHaridi SLee JPetrank E(2021)Investigating the semantics of futures in transactional memory systemsProceedings of the 26th ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming10.1145/3437801.3441594(16-30)Online publication date: 17-Feb-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3437801.3441594
Aksenov VGramoli VKuznetsov PShang DRavi S(2021)Optimal Concurrency for List-Based SetsParallel Computing Technologies10.1007/978-3-030-86359-3_29(386-401)Online publication date: 13-Sep-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-86359-3_29
Chaudhary VJuyal CKulkarni SKumari SPeri S(2019)Achieving Starvation-Freedom in Multi-version Transactional Memory SystemsNetworked Systems10.1007/978-3-030-31277-0_20(291-310)Online publication date: 19-Jun-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-31277-0_20
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Grasping the gap between blocking and non-blocking transactional memories

Transactional memory (TM) is an inherently optimistic abstraction: it allows concurrent processes to execute sequences of shared-data accesses (transactions) speculatively, with an option of aborting them in the future. Early TM designs avoided using ...
Model checking transactional memories

Model checking transactional memories (TMs) is difficult because of the unbounded number, length, and delay of concurrent transactions, as well as the unbounded size of the memory. We show that, under certain conditions satisfied by most TMs we know of, ...
Grasping the Gap Between Blocking and Non-Blocking Transactional Memories
DISC 2015: Proceedings of the 29th International Symposium on Distributed Computing - Volume 9363

Transactional memory TM is an inherently optimistic synchronization abstraction: it allows concurrent processes to execute sequences of shared-data accesses transactions speculatively, with an option of aborting them in the future. Early TM designs ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

DISC '08: Proceedings of the 22nd international symposium on Distributed Computing

September 2008

519 pages

ISBN:9783540877783

Editor:
Gadi Taubenfeld

Publisher

Springer-Verlag

Berlin, Heidelberg

Publication History

Published: 22 September 2008

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

24
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 13 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

Zeng JIssa SRomano PRodrigues LHaridi SLee JPetrank E(2021)Investigating the semantics of futures in transactional memory systemsProceedings of the 26th ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming10.1145/3437801.3441594(16-30)Online publication date: 17-Feb-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3437801.3441594
Aksenov VGramoli VKuznetsov PShang DRavi S(2021)Optimal Concurrency for List-Based SetsParallel Computing Technologies10.1007/978-3-030-86359-3_29(386-401)Online publication date: 13-Sep-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-86359-3_29
Chaudhary VJuyal CKulkarni SKumari SPeri S(2019)Achieving Starvation-Freedom in Multi-version Transactional Memory SystemsNetworked Systems10.1007/978-3-030-31277-0_20(291-310)Online publication date: 19-Jun-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-31277-0_20
Sutra PMarlier PSchiavoni VTrahay F(2018)Boosting Transactional Memory with Stricter SerializabilityCoordination Models and Languages10.1007/978-3-319-92408-3_11(231-251)Online publication date: 18-Jun-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-319-92408-3_11
Dongol BJagadeesan RRiely J(2017)Transactions in relaxed memory architecturesProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages10.1145/31581062:POPL(1-29)Online publication date: 27-Dec-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3158106
Fatourou PKanellou EKosmas ERabbi M(2016)WFR-TMJournal of Parallel and Distributed Computing10.1016/j.jpdc.2016.05.00296:C(134-151)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.jpdc.2016.05.002
Diegues NRomano P(2015)Time-WarpACM Transactions on Parallel Computing10.1145/27754352:2(1-44)Online publication date: 29-Jun-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2775435
Zhang BRavindran BPalmieri RDas SKrishnaswamy DKarkar SKorman AKumar MPortmann MSastry S(2015)Reducing Aborts in Distributed Transactional Systems through Dependency DetectionProceedings of the 16th International Conference on Distributed Computing and Networking10.1145/2684464.2684475(1-10)Online publication date: 4-Jan-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2684464.2684475
Diegues NRomano P(2014)Time-warpACM SIGPLAN Notices10.1145/2692916.255525949:8(167-178)Online publication date: 6-Feb-2014
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2692916.2555259
Ardekani MSutra PShapiro MRéveillère LCherkasova LTaïani F(2014)G-DURProceedings of the 15th International Middleware Conference10.1145/2663165.2663336(13-24)Online publication date: 8-Dec-2014
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2663165.2663336
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Abstract

References

Cited By

Recommendations

Grasping the gap between blocking and non-blocking transactional memories

Model checking transactional memories

Grasping the Gap Between Blocking and Non-Blocking Transactional Memories

Comments

Information

Published In

Publisher

Publication History

Qualifiers

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View options

Get Access

Login options

Full Access

Figures

Other

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media

Affiliations