Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/2933057.2933124acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespodcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
invited-talk

How Emerging Memory Technologies Will Have You Rethinking Algorithm Design

Published: 25 July 2016 Publication History

Abstract

We are on the cusp of the emergence of a new wave of nonvolatile memory technologies that are projected to become the dominant type of main memory in the near future. A key property of these new memory technologies is their asymmetric read-write costs: Writes can be an order of magnitude or more higher energy, higher latency, and lower (per-module) bandwidth than reads. This high cost for writes motivates a rethinking of algorithm design towards "write-efficient" algorithms and data structures that reduce their number of writes. Many popular techniques for sequential, distributed, and parallel algorithms are tuned to the setting where reads and writes cost the same, and hence need to be revisited. Prior work on reducing writes to contended cache lines in shared memory algorithms can be useful here, but with the new technologies, even writes to uncontended memory is costly. Moreover, the new technologies are unlikely to replace the fastest cache memory, motivating the study of a multi-level memory hierarchy comprised of smaller symmetric level(s) and a larger asymmetric level. Lower bounds, too, need to be revisited in light of asymmetric costs. This talk provides background on these emerging memory technologies, highlights the progress to date on these exciting research questions, and touches on a few of the many open problems.

References

[1]
N. Ben-David, G. E. Blelloch, J. T. Fineman, P. B. Gibbons, Y. Gu, C. McGuffey, and J. Shun. Parallel algorithms for asymmetric read-write costs. In ACM SPAA, 2016.
[2]
G. E. Blelloch, J. T. Fineman, P. B. Gibbons, Y. Gu, and J. Shun. Efficient algorithms under asymmetric read and write costs. arXiv:1511.01038, 2015.
[3]
G. E. Blelloch, J. T. Fineman, P. B. Gibbons, Y. Gu, and J. Shun. Sorting with asymmetric read and write costs. In ACM SPAA, 2015.
[4]
E. Carson, J. Demmel, L. Grigori, N. Knight, P. Koanantakool, O. Schwartz, and H. V. Simahdri. Write-avoiding algorithms. In IEEE IPDPS, 2016.
[5]
S. Chen, P. B. Gibbons, and S. Nath. Rethinking database algorithms for phase change memory. In CIDR, 2011.
[6]
S. D. Viglas. Write-limited sorts and joins for persistent memory. Proc. VLDB Endowment, 7(5), 2014.

Cited By

View all

Index Terms

  1. How Emerging Memory Technologies Will Have You Rethinking Algorithm Design

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Information & Contributors

        Information

        Published In

        cover image ACM Conferences
        PODC '16: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing
        July 2016
        508 pages
        ISBN:9781450339643
        DOI:10.1145/2933057
        Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

        Sponsors

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        Published: 25 July 2016

        Check for updates

        Author Tags

        1. asymmetric read-write costs
        2. memory hierarchies
        3. models of computation
        4. nvram
        5. persistent memory
        6. shared memory algorithms
        7. write-efficient algorithms

        Qualifiers

        • Invited-talk

        Funding Sources

        • National Science Foundation

        Conference

        PODC '16
        Sponsor:

        Acceptance Rates

        PODC '16 Paper Acceptance Rate 40 of 149 submissions, 27%;
        Overall Acceptance Rate 740 of 2,477 submissions, 30%

        Contributors

        Other Metrics

        Bibliometrics & Citations

        Bibliometrics

        Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)1
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
        Reflects downloads up to 17 Oct 2024

        Other Metrics

        Citations

        Cited By

        View all

        View Options

        Get Access

        Login options

        View options

        PDF

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        Media

        Figures

        Other

        Tables

        Share

        Share

        Share this Publication link

        Share on social media