Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming.threads > #2106

My conclusion about my scalable RWLocks...

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Hello,


I said that i have made the read and write sections a little bit bigger 
and the execution time inside the read and write sections was equal
and i have taken an average number of cache-lines tranfers and the
code inside the reader section was scalable, and it has given the 
following calculation results:

On a computer with 32 cores LW_RWLockX scales to 29X

On a computer with 32 cores LW_RWLock scales to 29X

And on a computer with 32 cores my RWLock and my RWLockX scales to 9X.


And i have said also that:

This is not the end of the story cause you have to understand that if 
from the time t1 to the time t2 there is writes and reads and from the 
time t2 to time t3 there is only reads, so even if the time from t1 to 
t2 will add more to the overall time cause there is writes threads, the 
perceived throughput from time t2 to t3 will be higher and the waiting 
time from t2 to t3 will be lower cause all my RWLocks will be scalable 
from t2 to t3 and this will make my all my RWLocks useful cause for 
exemple the database clients from internet or intranet waiting from t2 
to t3 will be served more quickly and this is still useful and this will 
make RWLockXX still useful.



So to conclude:

I think that all the variants of my scalable RWLock 3.05 are useful
and especially my LW_RWLOCK and LW_RWLockX that scales better.


You can download my scalable RWLock 3.05 from:


http://pages.videotron.com/aminer/


Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramadane.

Back to comp.programming.threads | Previous | Next | Find similar

Thread

My conclusion about my scalable RWLocks... aminer <aminer@toto.net> - 2014-03-18 15:55 -0700

csiph-web