Results 1  10
of
11
Adaptive mutual exclusion with local spinning
 In Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Distributed Computing
, 2000
"... Abstract We present an adaptive algorithm for Nprocess mutual exclusion under read/write atomicity in which all busy waiting is by local spinning. In our algorithm, each process p performs O(k) remote memory references to enter and exit its critical section, where k is the maximum "point conte ..."
Abstract

Cited by 43 (12 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract We present an adaptive algorithm for Nprocess mutual exclusion under read/write atomicity in which all busy waiting is by local spinning. In our algorithm, each process p performs O(k) remote memory references to enter and exit its critical section, where k is the maximum "point contention " experienced by p. The space complexity of our algorithm is \Theta (N), which is clearly optimal. Our algorithm is the first mutual exclusion algorithm under read/write atomicity that is adaptive when time complexity is measured by counting remote memory references. All previous socalled adaptive mutual exclusion algorithms employ busywaiting loops that can generate an unbounded number of remote memory references. Thus, they have unbounded time complexity under this measure.
A New FastPath Mechanism for Mutual Exclusion
 Distributed Computing
, 1999
"... In 1993, Yang and Anderson presented an Nprocess algorithm for mutual exclusion under read/write atomicity that has \Theta(log N) time complexity, where "time" is measured by counting remote memory references. In this algorithm, instances of a twoprocess mutual exclusion algorithm are embedded w ..."
Abstract

Cited by 8 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In 1993, Yang and Anderson presented an Nprocess algorithm for mutual exclusion under read/write atomicity that has \Theta(log N) time complexity, where "time" is measured by counting remote memory references. In this algorithm, instances of a twoprocess mutual exclusion algorithm are embedded within a binary arbitration tree. In the twoprocess algorithm that was used, all busywaiting is done by "local spinning." Performance studies presented by Yang and Anderson showed that their Nprocess algorithm exhibits scalable performance under heavy contention. One drawback of using an arbitration tree, however, is that each process is required to perform \Theta(log N) remote memory operations even when there is no contention. To remedy this problem, Yang and Anderson presented a variant of their algorithm that includes a "fastpath" mechanism that allows the arbitration tree to be bypassed in the absence of contention. This algorithm has the desirable property that contentionfre...
Long Lived Adaptive Splitter and Applications
, 1999
"... this paper we were able to define and implement a variant of the MoirAnderson splitter that does not have all the properties that their splitter has but on the other hand, has an adaptive and longlived implementation. Furthermore, we use this splitter as a building block in constructions other tha ..."
Abstract

Cited by 8 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
this paper we were able to define and implement a variant of the MoirAnderson splitter that does not have all the properties that their splitter has but on the other hand, has an adaptive and longlived implementation. Furthermore, we use this splitter as a building block in constructions other than a grid (for example a row of splitters or a tree of splitters) and in this way implement diverse applications such as mutual exclusion and optimal name space renaming
Randomized mutual exclusion with sublogarithmic RMRcomplexity
"... Abstract Mutual exclusion is a fundamental distributed coordination problem. Sharedmemory mutual exclusion research focuses on localspin algorithms and uses the remote memory references (RMRs) metric. Attiya, Hendler, and Woelfel (40th STOC, 2008) established an �(log N) lower bound on the number ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract Mutual exclusion is a fundamental distributed coordination problem. Sharedmemory mutual exclusion research focuses on localspin algorithms and uses the remote memory references (RMRs) metric. Attiya, Hendler, and Woelfel (40th STOC, 2008) established an �(log N) lower bound on the number of RMRs incurred by processes as they enter and exit the critical section, where N is the number of processes in the system. This matches the upper bound of Yang and Anderson (Distrib. Comput. 9(1):51–60, 1995). The upper and lower bounds apply for algorithms that only use read and write operations. The lower bound of Attiya et al., however, only holds for deterministic algorithms. The question of whether randomized mutual exclusion algorithms, using reads and writes only, can achieve sublogarithmic expected RMR complexity remained open. We answer this question in the affirmative by presenting starvationfree randomized mutual exclusion algorithms for the cache coherent (CC) and the distributed shared memory (DSM) model that have sublogarithmic expected RMR complexity against the strong adversary. More specifically, each process incurs an expected number of O(log N / log log N) RMRs per passage through the entry and exit sections, while in the worst case the number of RMRs is O(log N). P. Woelfel was supported by NSERC.
Randomized Mutual Exclusion in O(log N / log log N) RMRs [Extended Abstract]
"... Mutual exclusion is a fundamental distributed coordination problem. Sharedmemory mutual exclusion research focuses on localspin algorithms and uses the remote memory references (RMRs) metric. A recent proof [9] established an Ω(log N) lower bound on the number of RMRs incurred by processes as they ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Mutual exclusion is a fundamental distributed coordination problem. Sharedmemory mutual exclusion research focuses on localspin algorithms and uses the remote memory references (RMRs) metric. A recent proof [9] established an Ω(log N) lower bound on the number of RMRs incurred by processes as they enter and exit the critical section, matching an upper bound by Yang and Anderson [18]. Both these bounds apply for algorithms that only use read and write operations. The lower bound of [9] only holds for deterministic algorithms, however; the question of whether randomized mutual exclusion algorithms, using reads and writes only, can achieve sublogarithmic expected RMR complexity remained open. This paper answers this question in the affirmative. We present two strongadversary [8] randomized localspin mutual exclusion algorithms. In both algorithms, processes incur O(log N / log log N) expected RMRs per passage in every execution. Our first algorithm has suboptimal worstcase RMR complexity of O ( (log N / log log N) 2). Our second algorithm is a variant of the first that can be combined with a deterministic algorithm, such as [18], to obtain O(log N) worstcase RMR complexity. The combined algorithm thus achieves sublogarithmic expected RMR complexity while maintaining optimal worstcase RMR complexity. Our upper bounds apply for both the cache coherent (CC) and the distributed shared memory (DSM) models.
Long Lived and Adaptive Shared Memory Implementations
, 2001
"... this paper. Motivated by their first work Moir and Anderson developed renaming algorithms, in the read/write model, when such a bound on the maximum number of processes is known in advance. This led to a sequence of works on the renaming problem in this model [MA95, MG96, BGHM95] that lead to a long ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
this paper. Motivated by their first work Moir and Anderson developed renaming algorithms, in the read/write model, when such a bound on the maximum number of processes is known in advance. This led to a sequence of works on the renaming problem in this model [MA95, MG96, BGHM95] that lead to a longlived (2K \Gamma 1)renaming algorithm with O(K ) step complexity and O(K space complexity [Moi98]. These works employed various variants of the splitter building block which is a descendant of Lamport's adaptive mutual exclusion algorithm, however the last one [Moi98] depends on an additional work which is the first longlived renaming algorithm by Burns and Peterson [BP89]
Adaptive and Efficient Mutual Exclusion (Extended Abstract)
, 2000
"... ] Hagit Attiya and Vita Bortnikov Department of Computer Science The Technion Haifa 32000, Israel hagit@cs.technion.ac.il vitab@cs.technion.ac.il ABSTRACT A distributed algorithm is adaptive if its performance depends on k, the number of processes that are concurrently active during the algo ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
] Hagit Attiya and Vita Bortnikov Department of Computer Science The Technion Haifa 32000, Israel hagit@cs.technion.ac.il vitab@cs.technion.ac.il ABSTRACT A distributed algorithm is adaptive if its performance depends on k, the number of processes that are concurrently active during the algorithm execution (rather than on n, the total number of processes). This paper presents adaptive algorithm for mutual exclusion using only read and write operations. The worst case step complexity cannot be a measure for the performance of mutual exclusion algorithms, because it is always unbounded in the presence of contention. Therefore, a number of different parameters are used to measure the algorithm's performance: The remote step complexity is the maximal number of steps performed by a process where a wait is counted as one step. The system response time is the time interval between subsequent entries to the critical section, where one time unit is the minimal interval in which every a...
Appendix A
"... 60dB 4.20 512 96 ETSIA ETSIA ETSI1 60dB 4.20 1536 512 AWGN140 AWGN140 Draft Recommendation G.992.2 140 14 T1.601 #9 1536kbps 256kbps 49 Annex A G.992.2 15 T1.601 #9 1536kbps 256kbps 24 DSL 16 Shortened T1.601#7 1536kbps 256kbps 24 HDSL Table 47. Extended Reach Test Cases NOTE1: A goal of futu ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
60dB 4.20 512 96 ETSIA ETSIA ETSI1 60dB 4.20 1536 512 AWGN140 AWGN140 Draft Recommendation G.992.2 140 14 T1.601 #9 1536kbps 256kbps 49 Annex A G.992.2 15 T1.601 #9 1536kbps 256kbps 24 DSL 16 Shortened T1.601#7 1536kbps 256kbps 24 HDSL Table 47. Extended Reach Test Cases NOTE1: A goal of future enhancements of this Recommendation is to make the "Extended Reach Cases" mandatory. NOTE2: Performance levels do not reflect the effect of customer premise wiring, which is expected to reduce data rate.G.992.2G.992.2G.992.2 Draft Recommendation G.992.2 139 ANNEX D D.1 System Performance for North America All test loops specified in this section shall be used for G.992.2 and testing shall confirm to the following: . No power cutback on upstream transmitter. . Margin=4 dB . BER=10 7 . Background noise = 140 dBm/Hz . Rates, except where noted,
Mutual Exclusion withO(log 2 logn) Amortized Work
"... Abstract — This paper presents a new algorithm for mutual exclusion in which each passage through the critical section costs amortized O(log 2 logn) RMRs with high probability. The algorithm operates in a standard asynchronous, local spinning, sharedmemory model with an oblivious adversary. It guara ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract — This paper presents a new algorithm for mutual exclusion in which each passage through the critical section costs amortized O(log 2 logn) RMRs with high probability. The algorithm operates in a standard asynchronous, local spinning, sharedmemory model with an oblivious adversary. It guarantees that every process enters the critical section with high probability. The algorithm achieves its efficient performance by exploiting a connection between mutual exclusion and approximate counting. 1.