Abstract
In a multicore transactional memory (TM) system, concurrent execution threads interact and interfere with each other through shared memory. The less interference a program provokes the better for the system. However, as a programmer is primarily interested in optimizing her individual code’s performance rather than the system’s overall performance, she does not have a natural incentive to provoke as little interference as possible. Hence, a TM system must be designed compatible with good programming incentives (GPI), i.e., writing efficient code for the overall system coincides with writing code that optimizes an individual program’s performance. We show that with most contention managers (CM) proposed in the literature so far, TM systems are not GPI compatible. We provide a generic framework for CMs that base their decisions on priorities and explain how to modify Timestamp-like CMs so as to feature GPI compatibility. In general, however, priority-based conflict resolution policies are prone to be exploited by selfish programmers. In contrast, a simple non-priority-based manager that resolves conflicts at random is GPI compatible.
A full version including all proofs, is available as TIK Report 310 at http://www.tik.ee.ethz.ch.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Attiya, H., Epstein, L., Shachnai, H., Tamir, T.: Transactional contention management as a non-clairvoyant scheduling problem. In: PODC 2006: Proc. of the 25th annual ACM symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pp. 308–315 (2006)
Christodoulou, G., Koutsoupias, E.: The price of anarchy of finite congestion games. In: STOC 2005: Proc. of 37th annual symposium on Theory of computing, pp. 67–73 (2005)
Eidenbenz, R., Wattenhofer, R.: Brief announcement: Selfishness in transactional memory. In: SPAA 2009: Proc. of the 21st annual symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures, pp. 41–42 (2009)
Guerraoui, R., Herlihy, M., Pochon, B.: Toward a theory of transactional contention managers. In: PODC 2005: Proc. of the 24th annual ACM symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pp. 258–264 (2005)
Herlihy, M., Luchangco, V., Moir, M.: A flexible framework for implementing software transactional memory. SIGPLAN Not. 41(10), 253–262 (2006)
Herlihy, M., Moss, J.E.B.: Transactional memory: architectural support for lock-free data structures. SIGARCH Comput. Archit. News 21(2), 289–300 (1993)
Roughgarden, T.: Selfish Routing and the Price of Anarchy. MIT Press, Cambridge (2005)
Scherer III, W.N., Scott, M.L.: Contention Management in Dynamic Software Transactional Memory. In: PODC Workshop on Concurrency and Synchronization in Java Programs (CSJP), St. John’s, NL, Canada (July 2004)
Scherer III, W.N., Scott, M.L.: Advanced contention management for dynamic software transactional memory. In: PODC 2005: Proc. of the 24th annual ACM symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pp. 240–248 (2005)
Schneider, J., Wattenhofer, R.: Bounds On Contention Management Algorithms. In: Dong, Y., Du, D.-Z., Ibarra, O. (eds.) ISAAC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5878, pp. 441–451. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Eidenbenz, R., Wattenhofer, R. (2009). Good Programming in Transactional Memory. In: Dong, Y., Du, DZ., Ibarra, O. (eds) Algorithms and Computation. ISAAC 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5878. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10631-6_52
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10631-6_52
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-10630-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-10631-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)