Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3382734.3405712acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespodcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Brief Announcement: Intermediate Value Linearizability: A Quantitative Correctness Criterion

Published: 31 July 2020 Publication History

Abstract

A common correctness criterion for concurrent objects is linearizability. Intuitively, under linearizability, when a read overlaps an update, it must return either the object's value before the update or the value after it. Consider, for example, a batched counter supporting "batched" increments, and a single operation that bumps its value from 7 to 10. A read overlapping this update is allowed to return either 7 or 10. In this paper, we propose Intermediate Value Linearizability (IVL), a new correctness criterion that relaxes linearizability to allow returning intermediate values, for instance, 8 in the example above. IVL is applicable to objects whose return values are from a totally ordered set. Roughly speaking, it allows reads to return any value that is bounded between two return values that are legal under linearizability. We show that this added degree of freedom inherently allows for cheaper implementations than linearizability. In particular, we show a lower bound of Ω(n) on the step complexity of the update operation of a wait-free linearizable batched counter, and give a wait-free IVL implementation of the same object with an O(1) step complexity for update.

References

[1]
Hagit Attiya, Faith Ellen, and Panagiota Fatourou. 2006. The complexity of updating multi-writer snapshot objects. In International Conference on Distributed Computing and Networking. Springer, 319--330.
[2]
Armando Castañeda, Sergio Rajsbaum, and Michel Raynal. 2015. Specifying concurrent problems: beyond linearizability and up to tasks. In International Symposium on Distributed Computing. Springer, 420--435.
[3]
Thomas A Henzinger, Christoph M Kirsch, Hannes Payer, Ali Sezgin, and Ana Sokolova. 2013. Quantitative relaxation of concurrent data structures. In Proceedings of the 40th annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages. 317--328.
[4]
Maurice P Herlihy and Jeannette M Wing. 1990. Linearizability: A correctness condition for concurrent objects. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS) 12, 3 (1990), 463--492.
[5]
Jaap-Henk Hoepman and John Tromp. 1993. Binary snapshots. In International Workshop on Distributed Algorithms. Springer, 18--25.
[6]
Amos Israeli and Asaf Shirazi. 1998. The time complexity of updating snapshot memories. Inform. Process. Lett. 65, 1 (1998), 33--40.
[7]
Nihar R Mahapatra and Balakrishna Venkatrao. 1999. The processor-memory bottleneck: problems and solutions. XRDS: Crossroads, The ACM Magazine for Students 5, 3es (1999), 2.
[8]
Gil Neiger. 1994. Set-linearizability. In Proceedings of the thirteenth annual ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing. 396.

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
PODC '20: Proceedings of the 39th Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing
July 2020
539 pages
ISBN:9781450375825
DOI:10.1145/3382734
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part 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 components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 31 July 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

PODC '20
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 740 of 2,477 submissions, 30%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 63
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)4
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 13 Sep 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

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