The Inherent Cost of Remembering Consistently

Non-volatile memory (NVM) promises fast, byte-addressable and durable storage, with raw access latencies in the same order of magnitude as DRAM. But in order to take advantage of the durability of NVM, programmers need to design persistent objects which maintain consistent state across system crashes and restarts. Concurrent implementations of persistent objects typically make heavy use of expensive persistent fence instructions to order NVM accesses, thus negating some of the performance benefits of NVM. This raises the question of the minimal number of persistent fence instructions required to implement a persistent object. We answer this question in the deterministic lock-free case by providing lower and upper bounds on the required number of fence instructions. We obtain our upper bound by presenting a new universal construction that implements durably any object using at most one persistent fence per update operation invoked. Our lower bound states that in the worst case, each process needs to issue at least one persistent fence per update operation invoked

Log-Free Concurrent Data Structures

Non-volatile RAM (NVRAM) makes it possible for data structures to tolerate transient failures, assuming however that programmers have designed these structures such that their consistency is preserved upon recovery. Previous ap- proaches are typically transactional and inherently make heavy use of logging, resulting in implementations that are significantly slower than their DRAM counterparts. In this paper, we introduce a set of techniques aimed at lock-free data structures that, in the large majority of cases, remove the need for logging (and costly durable store instructions) both in the data structure algorithm and in the associated memory management scheme. Together, these generic techniques enable us to design what we call log-free concurrent data structures, which, as we illustrate on linked lists, hash tables, skip lists, and BSTs, can provide several-fold performance improvements over previous transaction-based implementations, with overheads of the order of milliseconds for recovery after a failure. We also highlight how our techniques can be integrated into practical systems, by presenting a durable version of Memcached that maintains the performance of its volatile counterpart

FloDB: Unlocking Memory in Persistent Key-Value Stores

Log-structured merge (LSM) data stores enable to store and process large volumes of data while maintaining good performance. They mitigate the I/O bottleneck by absorbing updates in a memory layer and transferring them to the disk layer in sequential batches. Yet, the LSM architecture fundamentally requires elements to be in sorted order. As the amount of data in memory grows, maintaining this sorted order becomes increasingly costly. Contrary to intuition, existing LSM systems could actually lose throughput with larger memory components. In this paper, we introduce FloDB, an LSM memory component architecture which allows throughput to scale on modern multicore machines with ample memory sizes. The main idea underlying FloDB is essentially to bootstrap the traditional LSM architecture by adding a small in-memory buffer layer on top of the memory component. This buffer offers low-latency operations, masking the write latency of the sorted memory component. Integrating this buffer in the classic LSM memory component to obtain FloDB is not trivial and requires revisiting the algorithms of the user-facing LSM operations (search, update, scan). FloDB's two layers can be implemented with state-of-the-art, highly-concurrent data structures. This way, as we show in the paper, FloDB eliminates significant synchronization bottlenecks in classic LSM designs, while offering a rich LSM API. We implement FloDB as an extension of LevelDB, Google's popular LSM key-value store. We compare FloDB's performance to that of state-of-the-art LSMs. In short, FloDB's performance is up to one order of magnitude higher than that of the next best-performing competitor in a wide range of multi-threaded workloads

Fast and Robust Memory Reclamation for Concurrent Data Structures

In concurrent systems without automatic garbage collection, it is challenging to determine when it is safe to reclaim memory, especially for lock-free data structures. Existing concurrent memory reclamation schemes are either fast but do not tolerate process delays, robust to delays but with high overhead, or both robust and fast but narrowly applicable. This paper proposes QSense, a novel concurrent memory reclamation technique. QSense is a hybrid technique with a fast path and a fallback path. In the common case (without process delays), a high-performing memory reclamation scheme is used (fast path). If process delays block memory reclamation through the fast path, a robust fallback path is used to guarantee progress. The fallback path uses hazard pointers, but avoids their notorious need for frequent and expensive memory fences. QSense is widely applicable, as we illustrate through several lock-free data structure algorithms. Our experimental evaluation shows that QSense has an overhead comparable to the fastest memory reclamation techniques, while still tolerating prolonged process delays

The Disclosure Power of Shared Objects

Shared objects are the means by which processes gather and exchange information about the state of a distributed system. Objects that disclose more information about the system—and thus provide a more centralized view—are therefore more desirable. In this paper, we propose the schedule reconstruction (SR) problem as a new metric for the disclosure power of shared memory objects. In schedule reconstruction, processes take steps which are interleaved to form a schedule; each process needs to be able to reconstruct the schedule up to its last step. We show that objects can be ranked in a hierarchy according to their ability to solve SR. In this hierarchy, stronger objects can implement weaker objects via a SR-based universal construction. We identify a connection between SR and consensus and prove that SR is at least as hard as consensus. Perhaps surprisingly, we show that objects that are powerful in solving consensus—such as compare-and-swap—are not always powerful in their ability to solve SR

Distributed Computing with Modern Shared Memory

In this thesis, we revisit classic problems in shared-memory distributed computing through the lenses of (1) emerging hardware technologies and (2) changing requirements. Our contributions consist, on the one hand, in providing a better understanding of the fundamental benefits and limitations of new technologies, and on the other hand, in introducing novel, efficient tools and systems to ease the task of leveraging new technologies or meeting new requirements. First, we look at Remote Direct Memory Access (RDMA), a networking hardware feature which enables a computer to access the memory of a remote computer without involving the remote CPU. In recent years, the distributed computing community has taken an interest in RDMA due to its ultra-low latency and high throughput and has designed systems that take advantage of these characteristics. However, we argue that the potential of RDMA for distributed computing remains largely untapped. We show that RDMAâs unique semantics enable agreement algorithms which improve on fundamental trade-offs in distributed computing between performance and failure-tolerance. Furthermore, we show the practical applicability of our theoretical results through Mu, a state machine replication system which can replicate requests in under 2 microseconds, and can fail-over in under 1 millisecond when failures occur. Muâs replication and fail-over latencies are at least 61% and 90% lower, respectively, than those of prior work. Second, we focus on persistent memory, a novel class of memory technologies which is only now starting to become available. Persistent memory provides byte-addressable persistent storage with access times comparable to traditional DRAM. Recent work has focused on designing tools for working with persistent memory, but little is known about the fundamental cost of providing consistency in persistent memory. Furthermore, important shared-memory primitives do not yet have efficient persistent implementations. We provide an answer to the former question through a tight bound on the number of persistent fences required to implement a lock-free persistent object. We address the latter problem by presenting a novel efficient multi-word compare-and-swap algorithm for persistent memory. Third and finally, we consider the current exponential increase in the amount of data worldwide. Memory capacity has been on the rise for decades, but remains scarce when compared to the rate of data growth. Given this scarcity and the prevalence of concurrent in-memory processing, the classic problem of concurrent memory reclamation remains highly relevant to this day. Previous work in this area has produced solutions which are either (a) fast but easily disrupted by process delays, or (b) slow but robust to process delays. We combine the best of both worlds in QSense, a memory reclamation algorithm which is fast in the common case when there are no process delays and falls back to a robust reclamation algorithm when process delays prevent the fast path from making progress

Leaderless Consensus

Abstract—Classical synchronous consensus algorithms are leaderless: processes exchange their proposals, pick the max and decide when they see the same choice across a couple of rounds. Indulgent consensus algorithms are more robust in that they only require eventual synchrony, but are however typically leader-based. Intuitively, this is a weakness for a slow leader can delay any decision. This paper asks whether, under eventual synchrony, it is possible to deterministically solve consensus without a leader. The fact that the weakest failure detector to solve consensus is one that also eventually elects a leader seems to indicate that the answer to the question is negative. We prove in this paper that the answer is actually positive. We first give a precise definition of the very notion of a leaderless algorithm. Then we present three indulgent leaderless consensus algorithms, each we believe interesting in its own right: (i) for shared memory, (ii) for message passing with omission failures and(iii) for message passing with Byzantine failures (with and without authentication)