Skip to main content

Three-dimensional meshes are less powerful than two-dimensional ones in oblivious routing

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Algorithms — ESA '97 (ESA 1997)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1284))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This paper shows an important exception against the common perception that three-dimensional meshes are more powerful than two-dimensional ones: Let N be the total number of processors. Then permutation routing over three-dimensional mesh computers needs Θ(N 2/3) steps while it takes Θ(N 1/2) steps over two-dimensional ones under the following condition: (1) The path of each packet must be determined solely by its initial position and destination, i.e., the algorithm must be oblivious. (2) Each path must be “elementary,” i.e., it must be shortest and as straight as possible. Thus the conditions are quite reasonable in practice, under which, little surprisingly, three-dimensional meshes are significantly less powerful than two-dimensional ones for the fundamental network operation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. A. Bar-Noy, P. Raghavan, B. Schieber and H. Tamaki, “Fast deflection routing for packets and worms,” In Proc. ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, 75–86 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  2. A. Borodin and J.E. Hopcroft, “Routing, merging, and sorting on parallel models of computation,” J. Computer and System Sciences 30 (1985) 130–145.

    Google Scholar 

  3. S. Cheung and F.C.M. Lau, “A lower bound for permutation routing on two-dimensional bused meshes,” Information Processing Letters 45 (1993) 225–228.

    Google Scholar 

  4. D.D. Chinn, T. Leighton and M. Tompa, “Minimal adaptive routing on the mesh with bounded queue size,” In Proc. 1994 ACM Symp. on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures (1994) 354–363.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Q.P. Gu and J. Gu, “Two packet routing algorithms on a mesh-connected computer,” IEEE Trans. on Parallel and Distributed Systems, Vol. 6, No. 4 (1995) 436–440.

    Google Scholar 

  6. K. Iwama, E. Miyano and Y. Kambayashi, “Routing problems on the mesh of buses,” J. Algorithms 20 (1996) 613–631.

    Google Scholar 

  7. K. Iwama and E. Miyano, “Oblivious routing algorithms on the mesh of buses,” In Proc. 11th International Parallel Processing Symposium, (1997) 721–727.

    Google Scholar 

  8. C. Kaklamanis, D. Krizanc and A. Tsantilas, “Tight bounds for oblivious routing in the hypercube,” Math. Systems Theory 24 (1991) 223–232.

    Google Scholar 

  9. C. Kaklamanis and D. Krizanc, “Optimal sorting on mesh-connected processor arrays,” In Proc. 1991 ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures, (1991) 17–28.

    Google Scholar 

  10. M. Kunde, “Lower bounds for sorting on mesh-connected architectures,” Acta Informatica, 24 (1987) 121–130.

    Google Scholar 

  11. F.T. Leighton, Introduction to Parallel Algorithms and Architectures: Arrays, Trees, Hypercubes, Morgan Kaufmann (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  12. F.T. Leighton, F. Makedon and I. Tollis, “A 2n-2 step algorithm for routing in an nxn array with constant queue sizes,” Algorithmica 14 (1995) 291–304.

    Google Scholar 

  13. L.Y.T. Leung and S.M. Shende, “Packet routing on square meshes with row and column buses,” In Proc. 1989 ACM Symp. on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures (1989) 328–335.

    Google Scholar 

  14. L.Y.T. Leung and S.M. Shende, “On multidimensional packet routing for meshes with buses,” J. Parallel and Distributed Computing 20 (1994) 187–197.

    Google Scholar 

  15. T. Nesson, Randomized, oblivious, minimal routing algorithms for multi-computers, Ph.D Thesis, Harvard University (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  16. C.P. Schnorr and A. Shamir, “An optimal sorting algorithm for mesh-connected computers,” In Proc. ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, (1986) 255–263.

    Google Scholar 

  17. J.F. Sibeyn, M. Kaufmann and R. Raman, “Randomized routing on meshes with buses,” In Proc. European Symposium on Algorithms, (1993) 333–344.

    Google Scholar 

  18. T. Suel, “Routing and sorting on fixed topologies,” Ph.D Thesis, The University of Texas at Austin (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  19. S. Rajasekaran and R. Overholt, “Constant queue routing on a mesh,” J. Parallel and Distributed Comput., 15 (1992) 160–166.

    Google Scholar 

  20. S. Rajasekaran and T. Tsantilas, “Optimal routing algorithms for meshconnected processor arrays,” Algorithmica 8 (1992) 21–38.

    Google Scholar 

  21. M. Tompa, Lecture notes on message routing in parallel machines, Technical Report # 94-06-05, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Washington (1994).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kazuo Iwama .

Editor information

Rainer Burkard Gerhard Woeginger

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Iwama, K., Miyano, E. (1997). Three-dimensional meshes are less powerful than two-dimensional ones in oblivious routing. In: Burkard, R., Woeginger, G. (eds) Algorithms — ESA '97. ESA 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1284. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63397-9_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63397-9_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-63397-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69536-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics