Advertisement

Scheduling Open-Nested Transactions in Distributed Transactional Memory

Conference paper
  • 533 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7890)

Abstract

Distributed transactional memory (DTM) is a powerful concurrency control model for distributed systems sparing the programmer from the complexity of manual implementation of lock-based distributed synchronization. We consider Herlihy and Sun’s dataflow DTM model, where objects are migrated to invoking transactions, and the open nesting model of managing inner (distributed) transactions. In this paper we present DATS, a dependency-aware transactional scheduler, that is able to boost the throughput of open-nested transactions reducing the overhead of running expensive compensating actions and abstract locks in the case of outer transaction aborts. The contribution of the paper is twofold: (A) DATS allows the commutable outer transactions to be validated concurrently and (B) allows the non-commutable outer transactions, depending on their inner transactions, to commit be committed before others without dependencies.

Keywords

Hash Table Transactional Memory Shared Object Validation Time Dependency Level 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Agrawal, K., Lee, I.-T.A., Sukha, J.: Safe open-nested transactions through ownership. In: SPAA (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Agrawal, K., Leiserson, C.E., Sukha, J.: Memory models for open-nested transactions. In: MSPC (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ansari, M., Luján, M., Kotselidis, C., Jarvis, K., Kirkham, C., Watson, I.: Steal-on-abort: Improving transactional memory performance through dynamic transaction reordering. In: Seznec, A., Emer, J., O’Boyle, M., Martonosi, M., Ungerer, T. (eds.) HiPEAC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5409, pp. 4–18. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Attiya, H., Milani, A.: Transactional scheduling for read-dominated workloads. In: Abdelzaher, T., Raynal, M., Santoro, N. (eds.) OPODIS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5923, pp. 3–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blake, G., Dreslinski, R.G., Mudge, T.: Proactive transaction scheduling for contention management. In: Microarchitecture, pp. 156–167 (December 2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Couceiro, M., Romano, P., Carvalho, N., Rodrigues, L.: D2STM: Dependable distributed software transactional memory. In: PRDC (November 2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    TPC Council. Tpc-c benchmark, revision 5.11 (February 2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Demmer, M.J., Herlihy, M.P.: The arrow distributed directory protocol. In: Kutten, S. (ed.) DISC 1998. LNCS, vol. 1499, pp. 119–133. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dolev, S., Hendler, D., Suissa, A.: CAR-STM: scheduling-based collision avoidance and resolution for software transactional memory. In: PODC (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dragojević, A., Guerraoui, R., et al.: Preventing versus curing: avoiding conflicts in transactional memories. In: PODC 2009, pp. 7–16 (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garcia-Molina, H.: Using semantic knowledge for transaction processing in a distributed database. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 8(2), 186–213 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Herlihy, M., Koskinen, E.: Transactional boosting: a methodology for highly-concurrent transactional objects. In: PPoPP 2008, pp. 207–216. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Herlihy, M., Luchangco, V., Moir, M.: A flexible framework for implementing software transactional memory. In: OOPSLA, pp. 253–262 (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Herlihy, M., Sun, Y.: Distributed transactional memory for metric-space networks. Distributed Computing 20(3), 195–208 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim, J., Ravindran, B.: On transactional scheduling in distributed transactional memory systems. In: Dolev, S., Cobb, J., Fischer, M., Yung, M. (eds.) SSS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6366, pp. 347–361. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim, J., Ravindran, B.: Scheduling closed-nested transactions in distributed transactional memory. IPDPS, 1–10 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Moravan, Bobba, Moore, Yen, Hill, Liblit, Swift, Wood: Supporting nested transactional memory in logTM. SIGPLAN Not. 41(11) (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moss, E.B.: Nested transactions: An approach to reliable distributed computing. Technical report, Cambridge, MA, USA (1981)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Moss, J.E.B.: Open-nested transactions: Semantics and support. In: Workshop of Memory Performance Issues (2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Moss, J.E.B., Hosking, A.L.: Nested transactional memory: model and architecture sketches. Sci. Comput. Program. 63, 186–201 (2006)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Palmieri, R., Quaglia, F., Romano, P.: Osare: Opportunistic speculation in actively replicated transactional systems. In: SRDS (2011)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Saad, M., Binoy, R.: Supporting STM in distributed systems: Mechanisms and a Java framework. In: ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Transactional Computing 2011 (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Saad, M.M., Ravindran, B.: HyFlow: a high performance distributed software transactional memory framework. In: HPDC 2011 (2011)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Turcu, R.: On open nesting in distributed transactional memory. In: SYSTOR (2012)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Turcu, A., Ravindran, B.: On closed nesting in distributed transactional memory. In: Seventh ACM SIGPLAN workshop on Transactional Computing (2012)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Weikum, G.: Principles and realization strategies of multilevel transaction management. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 16(1), 132–180 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yang, Menon, Ali-Reza, Antony, Hudson, Moss, Saha, Shpeisman: Open nesting in software transactional memory. In: PPoPP. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yoo, R.M., Lee, H.-H.S.: Adaptive transaction scheduling for transactional memory systems. In: SPAA, pp. 169–178 (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ECE DepartmentVirginia TechBlacksburgUSA

Personalised recommendations