Looking for efficient implementations of concurrent objects
Pages 74 - 87
Abstract
As introduced by Taubenfeld, a contention-sensitive implementation of a concurrent object is an implementation such that the overhead introduced by locking is eliminated in the common cases, i.e., when there is no contention or when the operations accessing concurrently the object are non-interfering. This paper, that can be considered as an introductory paper to this topic, presents a methodological construction of a contention-sensitive implementation of a concurrent stack. In a contention-free context a push or pop operation does not rest on a lock mechanism and needs only six accesses to the shared memory. In case of concurrency a single lock is required. Moreover, the implementation is starvation-free (any operation is eventually executed). The paper, that presents the algorithms in an incremental way, visits also a family of liveness conditions and important concurrency-related concepts such as the notion of an abortable object.
References
[1]
Aguilera, M.K., Frolund, S., Hadzilacos, V., Horn, S.L., Toueg, S.: Abortable and Query-abortable Objects and their Implementations. In: Proc. 26th Int'l ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC 2007), pp. 23-32. ACM Press, New York (2007).
[2]
Bernstein, P.A., Hadzilacos, V., Goodman, N.: Concurrency Control and Recovery in Database Systems, p. 370. Addison Wesley Publishing Company, Reading (1987).
[3]
Dijkstra, E.W.D.: Hierarchical Ordering of Sequential Processes. Acta Informatica 1(1), 115-138 (1971).
[4]
Fich, F.E., Luchangco, V., Moir, M., Shavit, N.N.: Obstruction-free algorithms can be practically wait-free. In: Fraigniaud, P. (ed.) DISC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3724, pp. 78-92. Springer, Heidelberg (2005).
[5]
Guerraoui, R., Kapalka, M., Kuznetsov, P.: The Weakest Failure Detectors to Boost Obstruction-freedom. Distributed Computing 20(6), 415-433 (2008).
[6]
Guerraoui, R., Raynal, M.: From Unreliable Objects to Reliable Objects: The Case of Atomic Registers and Consensus. In: Malyshkin, V.E. (ed.) PaCT 2007. LNCS, vol. 4671, pp. 47-61. Springer, Heidelberg (2007).
[7]
Herlihy, M.P.: Wait-Free Synchronization. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 13(1), 124-149 (1991).
[8]
Herlihy, M.P., Luchangco, V., Moir, M.: Obstruction-free Synchronization: Double-ended Queues as an Example. In: Proc. 23th Int'l IEEE Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS 2003), pp. 522-529. IEEE Press, New York (2003).
[9]
Herlihy, M.P., Shavit, N.: The Art of Multiprocessor Programming, p. 508. Morgan Kaufman Pub., San Francisco (2008).
[10]
Herlihy, M.P., Wing, J.M.: Linearizability: a Correctness Condition for Concurrent Objects. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 12(3), 463-492 (1990).
[11]
Hewitt, C.E., Atkinson, R.R.: Specification and Proof Techniques for Serializers. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering SE5(1), 1-21 (1979).
[12]
Hoare, C.A.R.: Monitors: an Operating System Structuring Concept. Communications of the ACM 17(10), 549-557 (1974).
[13]
Jayanti, P.: Adaptive and Efficient Abortable Mutual Exclusion. In: Proc. 22th Int'l ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC 2003), pp. 295-304. ACM Press, New York (2003).
[14]
Lamport, L.: How to Make a Multiprocessor Computer that Correctly Executes Multiprocess Programs. IEEE Transactions on Computers C28(9), 690-691 (1979).
[15]
Lamport, L.: On Interprocess Communication, Part 1: Basic formalism, Part II: Algorithms. Distributed Computing 1(2), 77-101 (1986).
[16]
Lamport, L.: A Fast Mutual Exclusion Algorithm. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems 5(1), 1-11 (1987).
[17]
Peterson, G.L.: Myths about Mutual Exclusion. Information Processing Letters 12(3), 115-116 (1981).
[18]
Raynal, M.: Algorithms for Mutual Exclusion, p. 107. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1986); ISBN 0-262-18119-3.
[19]
Raynal, M.: Locks Considered Harmful: A Look at Non-traditional Synchronization. In: Brinkschulte, U., Givargis, T., Russo, S. (eds.) SEUS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5287, pp. 369-380. Springer, Heidelberg (2008).
[20]
Raynal, M.: Shared Memory Synchronization in Presence of Failures: an Exercise-based Introduction. In: IEEE Int'l Conference on Complex, Intelligent and Software Intensive Systems (CISIS 2009), pp. 9-18. IEEE Press, New York (2009).
[21]
Raynal, M.: On the Implementation of Concurrent Objects. Technical Report 1968, IRISA, Université de Rennes, France (2011); To appear in a Springer Verlag LNCS special issue dedicated to the 75th birthday of Brian Randell.
[22]
Shafiei, N.: Non-blocking Array-Based Algorithms for Stacks and Queues. In: Garg, V., Wattenhofer, R., Kothapalli, K. (eds.) ICDCN 2009. LNCS, vol. 5408, pp. 55-66. Springer, Heidelberg (2008).
[23]
Suzuki, I., Kasami, T.: A Distributed Mutual Exclusion Algorithm. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems 3(4), 344-349 (1985).
[24]
Taubenfeld, G.: Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming, p. 423. Pearson Prentice-Hall, London (2006); ISBN 0-131-97259-6.
[25]
Taubenfeld, G.: Efficient Transformations of Obstruction-Free Algorithms into Nonblocking Algorithms. In: Pelc, A. (ed.) DISC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4731, pp. 450-464. Springer, Heidelberg (2007).
[26]
Taubenfeld, G.: Contention-Sensitive Data Structures and Algorithms. In: Keidar, I. (ed.) DISC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5805, pp. 157-171. Springer, Heidelberg (2009).
- Looking for efficient implementations of concurrent objects
Recommendations
On the implementation of concurrent objects
Dependable and Historic ComputingThe implementation of objects shared by concurrent processes, with provable safety and liveness guarantees, is a fundamental issue of concurrent programming in shared memory systems. It is now largely accepted that linearizability (or atomicity) is an ...
On asymmetric progress conditions
PODC '10: Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGACT-SIGOPS symposium on Principles of distributed computingWait-freedom and obstruction-freedom have received a lot of attention in the literature. These are symmetric progress conditions in the sense that they consider all processes as being "equal". Wait-freedom has allowed to rank the synchronization power ...
Towards a universal construction for transaction-based multiprocess programs
The aim of a Software Transactional Memory (STM) system is to discharge the programmer from the explicit management of synchronization issues. The programmer's job resides in the design of multiprocess programs in which processes are made up of ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Sponsors
- Russian Fund for Basic Resch: Russian Fund for Basic Research
- LUFTHANSA: Lufthansa Official Airlines
- AST: Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Tatarstan
- Russian Acadamy of Sciences: Russian Acadamy of Sciences
- KFU: Kazan Federal University
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Berlin, Heidelberg
Publication History
Published: 19 September 2011
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Article
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 0Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 06 Oct 2024