Profiling Transactional Applications

  • Vincent Gramoli
  • Rachid Guerraoui
  • Anne-Marie Kermarrec
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9466)

Abstract

What does it mean for two transactional applications to be similar? We address this question in this paper by highlighting four distinctive features of transactional applications: (1) the transaction size, i.e., the average number of memory accesses of the transactions; (2) the read-write ratio, i.e., the ratio between the number of accesses that modify the data and those that do not; (3) the contention, i.e., the number of concurrent accesses to the same shared data, such that at least one of these accesses is a write; (4) the uniformity, i.e., the extend to which transactions access distinct objects. We show that the similarity between an application A and an application \(A'\) can be derived from these features and can be used to determine which concurrency control implementation works best for A based on having tested which worked best for \(A'\). We convey the accuracy of the profiling and predictions based on a study with six workloads and ten concurrency control mechanisms.

Keywords

Recommendation system Performance Collaborative filtering Concurrency control 

References

  1. 1.
    Boutet, A., Frey, D., Guerraoui, R., Jégou, A., Kermarrec, A.-M.: WhatsUp decentralized instant news recommender. In: IPDPS (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Minh, C.C., Chung, J.W., Kozyrakis, C., Olukotun, K.: STAMP: stanford transactional applications for multi-processing. In: IISWC (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Castro, M., Góes, L.F.W., Fernandes, L.G., Méhaut, J.-F.: Dynamic thread mapping based on machine learning for transactional memory applications. In: Kaklamanis, C., Papatheodorou, T., Spirakis, P.G. (eds.) Euro-Par 2012. LNCS, vol. 7484, pp. 465–476. Springer, Heidelberg (2012) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Castro, M., Goes, L.F.W., Ribeiro, C.P., Cole, M., Cintra, M., Mehaut, J.-.F.: A machine learning-based approach for thread mapping on transactional memory applications. In: HIPC 2011, pp. 1–10 (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Crain, T., Gramoli, V., Raynal, M.: A speculation-friendly binary search tree. In: PPoPP, pp. 161–170 (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Crain, T., Gramoli, V., Raynal, M.: A contention-friendly binary search tree. In: Wolf, F., Mohr, B., an Mey, D. (eds.) Euro-Par 2013. LNCS, vol. 8097, pp. 229–240. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Crain, T., Gramoli, V., Raynal, M.: No hot spot non-blocking skip list. In: ICDCS, July 2013Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    David, T., Guerraoui, R., Trigonakis, V.: Everything you always wanted to know about synchronization but were afraid to ask. In: SOSP, pp. 33–48 (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dice, D., Shalev, O., Shavit, N.N.: Transactional locking II. In: Dolev, S. (ed.) DISC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4167, pp. 194–208. Springer, Heidelberg (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Didona, D., Felber, P., Harmanci, D., Romano, P., Schenker, J.: Identifying the optimal level of parallelism in transactional memory applications. In: Gramoli, V., Guerraoui, R. (eds.) NETYS 2013. LNCS, vol. 7853, pp. 233–247. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Felber, P., Fetzer, C., Riegel, T.: Dynamic performance tuning of word-based software transactional memory. In: PPoPP, pp. 237–246 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Felber, P., Gramoli, V., Guerraoui, R.: Elastic transactions. In: Keidar, I. (ed.) DISC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5805, pp. 93–107. Springer, Heidelberg (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gramoli, V.: More than you ever wanted to know about synchronization: synchrobench, measuring the impact of the synchronization on concurrent algorithms. In: PPoPP, pp. 1–10 (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gramoli, V., Guerraoui, R.: Democratizing transactional programming. Commun. ACM 57(1), 86–93 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gramoli, V., Guerraoui, R.: Reusable concurrent data types. In: Jones, R. (ed.) ECOOP 2014. LNCS, vol. 8586, pp. 182–206. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Guerraoui, R., Herlihy, M., Pochon, B.: Toward a theory of transactional contention managers. In: PODC, pp. 258–264 (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Herlihy, M., Luchangco, V., Moir, M., Scherer III, W.N.: Software transactional memory for dynamic-sized data structures. In: PODC, pp. 92–101 (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lucia, B., Ceze, L.: Cooperative empirical failure avoidance for multithreaded programs. In: ASPLOS, pp. 39–50 (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marathe, V.J., Spear, M.F., Heriot, C., Acharya, A., Eisenstat, D., Scherer III, W.N., Scott, M.L.: Lowering the overhead of software transactional memory. Technical report 893, University of Rochester, March 2006Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Martin, M.M.K., Hill, M.D., Sorin, D.J.: Why on-chip cache coherence is here to stay. Commun. ACM 55(7), 78–89 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wang, Q., Kulkarni, S., Cavazos, J., Spear, M.: A transactional memory with automatic performance tuning. ACM Trans. Archit. Code Optim. 8(4), 1–23 (2012)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rughetti, D.: Autonomic concurrency regulation in software transactional memories. Ph.D. thesis, Sapienza University of Rome (2014)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rughetti, D., Di Sanzo, P., Ciciani, B., Quaglia, F.: Machine learning-based self-adjusting concurrency in software transactional memory systems. In: IEEE MASCOTS, pp. 278–285 (2012)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Scherer III, W.N., Scott, M.L.: Advanced contention management for dynamic software transactional memory. In: PODC, pp. 240–248 (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Scherer III, W.N., Scott, M.L.: Contention management in dynamic software transactional memory. In: Proceedings of the ACM PODC Workshop on Concurrency and Synchronization in Java Programs, July 2004Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Singhal, A.: Modern information retrieval: a brief overview. Bull. IEEE Comput. Soc. Tech. Committee on Data Eng. 24(4), 35–42 (2001)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tan, P.-N., Steinbach, M., Kumar, V.: Introduction to Data Mining. Pearson Addison Wesley, Boston (2006) Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vincent Gramoli
    • 1
    • 2
  • Rachid Guerraoui
    • 3
  • Anne-Marie Kermarrec
    • 4
  1. 1.NICTASydneyAustralia
  2. 2.University of SydneySydneyAustralia
  3. 3.EPFLLausanneSwitzerland
  4. 4.INRIARennesFrance

Personalised recommendations