Abstract
AbstractTransactional memory systems trade ease of programming with run‐time performance losses in handling transactions. This paper focuses on starvation effects that show up in systems where unordered transactions are committed on a demand‐driven basis. Such simple commit arbitration policies are prone to starvation. The design issues for commit arbitration policies are analyzed and novel policies that reduce the amount of wasted computation due to roll‐back and, most important, that avoid starvation are proposed. We analyze in detail how to incorporate them in the transactional coherence and consistency protocol as well as a scalable version of it. The proposed schemes are shown to have no impact on the common‐case performance and add quite modest complexity to the baseline protocol. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
