Hello,
If you ask me a question like: Amine, is there any new parallel Skiplist algorithm that is more efficient than your conccurrent algorithm that uses a distributed read-writer mutex ? I have thought more, and i have come with a new Parallel Skiplist algorithm that is scalable on a read mostly workload, this algorithm uses only an mfence on the reader side, that's really cool ! and it elevates the weakness of the distributed reader-writer mutex that becomes slower and slower on the writer side with more an more threads, in my new concurrent Skiplist algorithm i am using one SeqlockX between the search() and the insert() methods , you will find my SeqlockX algorithm that avoids livelock when there is many writers here: https://sites.google.com/site/aminer68/scalable-seqlockx and i am also using one distributed reader-writer mutex between the delete() and the search() methods... This new algorithm is faster than my previous concurrent SkipList algorthm, but i have made a scalability prediction for my new algorithm and i have noticed that since the serial part of the Amdahl's law of the writer side is a little bit expensive since the average search in a Skiplist can become a little bit expensive, so my calculation have proved that you will not get much improvement with this new algorithm compared to my previous algorithm, you will get around 3x improvement max, so i have finally decided to not implement my new concurrent SkipList algorithm, so i will stay with my current concurrent SkipList algorithm that gives a decent scalability. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Scalable Synchronization Algorithms" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lock-free/f808bfa3-27cf-4d1e-acaf-f7f422412b8a%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
