A Performance Comparison of Homeless and Home-based Lazy Release Consistency Protocols in Software Shared Memory
In this paper, we compare the performance of two multiple-writer protocols based on lazy release consistency. In particular, we compare the performance of Princeton’s home-based protocol and TreadMarks’ protocol on a 32-processor platform. We found that the performance difference between the two protocols was less than 4% for four out of seven applications. For the three applications on which performance differed by more than 4%, the TreadMarks protocol performed better for two because most of their data were migratory, while the home-based protocol performed better for one. For this one application, the explicit control over the location of data provided by the home-based protocol resulted in a better distribution of communication load across the processors. These results differ from those of a previous comparison of the two protocols. We attribute this difference to (1) a different ratio of memory to network bandwidth on our platform and (2) lazy diffing and request overlapping, two optimizations used by TreadMarks that were not used in the previous study.
Record created on 2005-10-20, modified on 2016-08-08