Lightweight Transactional Arrays for Read-Dominated Workloads

  • Ivo Anjo
  • João Cachopo
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7017)


Many common workloads rely on arrays as a basic data structure on top of which they build more complex behavior. Others use them because they are a natural representation for their problem domains.

Software Transactional Memory (STM) has been proposed as a new concurrency control mechanism that simplifies concurrent programming. Yet, most STM implementations have no special representation for arrays. This results, on many STMs, in inefficient internal representations, where much overhead is added while tracking each array element individually, and on other STMs in false-sharing conflicts, because writes to different elements on the same array result in a conflict.

In this work we propose new designs for array implementations that are integrated with the STM, allowing for improved performance and reduced memory usage for read-dominated workloads, and present the results of our implementation of the new designs on top of the JVSTM, a Java library STM.


Parallel Programming Software Transactional Memory 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bronson, N., Chafi, H., Olukotun, K.: CCSTM: A library-based STM for ScalaGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cachopo, J., Rito-Silva, A.: Versioned boxes as the basis for memory transactions. Science of Computer Programming 63(2), 172–185 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cachopo, J.: Development of Rich Domain Models with Atomic Actions. Ph.D. thesis, Technical University of Lisbon (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dice, D., Shalev, O., Shavit, N.: Transactional locking II. In: Dolev, S. (ed.) DISC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4167, pp. 194–208. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dragojević, A., Guerraoui, R., Kapalka, M.: Stretching transactional memory. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 44, 155–165 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fernandes, S., Cachopo, J.: Lock-free and scalable multi-version software transactional memory. In: Proceedings of the 16th ACM Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming, pp. 179–188. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fraser, K., Harris, T.: Practical lock-freedom. Tech. rep. (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fraser, K., Harris, T.: Concurrent programming without locks. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 25 (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Guerraoui, R., Kapalka, M.: On the correctness of transactional memory. In: PPoPP 2008: Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming, pp. 175–184. ACM, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harris, T., Larus, J., Rajwar, R.: Transactional memory. Synthesis Lectures on Computer Architecture 5(1), 1–263 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Herlihy, M., Luchangco, V., Moir, M.: A flexible framework for implementing software transactional memory. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 41(10), 253–262 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Manson, J., Pugh, W., Adve, S.: The Java Memory ModelGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Marathe, V.J., Scherer, W.N., Scott, M.L.: Design tradeoffs in modern software transactional memory systems. In: Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Workshop on Languages, Compilers, and Run-Time Support for Scalable Systems, LCR 2004, pp. 1–7. ACM, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Riegel, T., Brum, D.B.D.: Making object-based STM practical in unmanaged environments. In: TRANSACT 2008: 3rd Workshop on Transactional Computing (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shavit, N., Touitou, D.: Software transactional memory. Distributed Computing 10(2), 99–116 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ivo Anjo
    • 1
  • João Cachopo
    • 1
  1. 1.ESWINESC-ID Lisboa/Instituto Superior Técnico/Universidade Técnica de LisboaLisboaPortugal

Personalised recommendations