1 / 11

Synchronization Methods for Multicore Programming

Synchronization Methods for Multicore Programming. Brendan Lynch. Introduction. Synchronization techniques l ocks, barriers, non-blocking approaches, atomic primitives Concurrent memory paradigms s hared memory, d istributed memory Safety concerns and guarantees

meda
Download Presentation

Synchronization Methods for Multicore Programming

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Synchronization Methods for Multicore Programming Brendan Lynch

  2. Introduction • Synchronization techniques • locks, barriers, non-blocking approaches, atomic primitives • Concurrent memory paradigms • shared memory, distributed memory • Safety concerns and guarantees • Mutual exclusion, deadlock, livelock, starvation, race conditions, priority inversion

  3. Synchronization in the Cloud • Granularity of synchronization plays a major roll in parallel performance. Modeling the concurrency of a program allows the user to decide on correct granularity. • Cloud computing relies on a classic distributed memory paradigm. • Memory updates in the cloud are very expensive

  4. Synchronization in the Cloud • Local parallel code should always be optimized for concurrency. • Coarse grain locks provide necessary data synchronization • Design emphasis on reliability and not performance

  5. Chubby Locks • Relies on a locking file system as well as paxos algorithm master election. • These combined give users the illusion of sequential programming • System scales well with development • ‘Young’ systems do not plan for consensus protocol • Maintaining a small file system allows for local small read/write. • Commonly used for synchronizing events with high polling.

  6. Zookeeper • Used by Amazon Simple Queue Service • Claims wait free synchronization through operation linearizability • Coordination kernel allows users to program their own primitive operations. This is important for application specific synchronization requirements. • Zookeeper has two basic ordering guarantees • Linearizable writes and FIFO client order

  7. Zookeeper • Linearizable writes: all requests that update the state of ZooKeeper are serializable and respect precedence • FIFO client ordering: all requests from a given client are executed in the order that they were sent by the client. • Locks and other primitives can be easily built in to the system. Blocking primitives will down-grade offered guarantees; except for the two mentioned above.

  8. Zookeeper • Zab uses by default simple majority quorums to decide on a proposal, so Zab and thus ZooKeeper can only work if a majority of servers are correct (i.e., with 2f + 1 server we can tolerate f failures).

  9. write(2) write(1) Read/Write Register Example linearizable write(0) write(2) read(1) write(1) time time (4) Art of Multiprocessor Programming

  10. write(2) write(1) Read/Write Register Example Not linearizable write(0) read(1) write(2) read(2) write(1) time time (2) Art of Multiprocessor Programming

  11. References • Mike Burrows, The Chubby lock service for loosely-coupled distributed systems, Proceedings of the 7th symposium on Operating systems design and implementation, November 06-08, 2006, Seattle, Washington • Maurice Herlihy and NirShavit. The Art of Multiprocessor Programming. Morgan Kaufmann, March 2008. • P. Hunt, M. Konar, F. P. Junqueira, and B. Reed, "ZooKeeper: wait-free coordination for internet-scale systems," in USENIXATC'10: Proceedings of the 2010 USENIX conference on USENIX annual technical conference. Berkeley, CA, USA: USENIX Association, 2010, pp. 11-11. 

More Related