- Read again... - 1 Update
- cmsg cancel <mpogn9$ing$1@dont-email.me> - 3 Updates
- About Scalability... - 1 Update
- User-Level Implementations of Read-Copy Update - 1 Update
| Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Aug 03 05:24PM -0700 Read again, i correct... Hello, We have to be smart... I have implemented 3 parallel computing projects, here they are: 1- Scalable Parallel HashList Read more about it here: https://sites.google.com/site/aminer68/scalable-parallel-hashlist 2- Scalable Parallel Varfiler Read more about it here: https://sites.google.com/site/aminer68/scalable-parallel-varfiler 3- Concurrent SkipList Read more about it here: https://sites.google.com/site/aminer68/concurrent-skiplist The first two are scalable, but the concurrent Skiplist uses a Scalable Distributed Reader-Writer Mutex, so it is not as scalable as the first two, so what can we do about it? Here is a solution: When the keys are of type strings use my Scalable Parallel HashList or my Scalable Parallel Varfiler in combination with my Skiplist , so when you insert, you insert in both of them, and when you delete you delete in both of them and when you search for a key , you search for it in my Scalable Parallel HashList or my Scalable Parallel Varfiler, and when you want to get the sorted list you can get it easily from the parallel skiplist above.. this way you can get both of the charracteristic of my scalable Hashtable and the charracteristic of my Parallel Skiplist. But when you are using numbers, you can simply use a my parallel skiplist above and you have to not worry about scalability , because when you are using numbers since the compare function of two number that you find on a Parallel Hahtable or a Parallel Skiplist takes very few CPU cycles , so it will not get a good scalability. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Aug 03 09:52PM +0200 |
| bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Aug 03 11:22PM +0200 |
| bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Aug 03 11:24PM +0200 |
| Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Aug 03 05:22PM -0700 Hello, We have to be smart... I have implemented 3 parallel computing projects, here they are: 1- Scalable Parallel HashList Read more about it here: https://sites.google.com/site/aminer68/scalable-parallel-hashlist 2- Scalable Parallel Varfiler Read more about it here: https://sites.google.com/site/aminer68/scalable-parallel-varfiler 3- Concurrent SkipList Read more about it here: https://sites.google.com/site/aminer68/concurrent-skiplist The first two are scalable, but the concurrent Skiplist uses a Scalable Distributed Reader-Writer Mutex, so it is not as scalable as the first two, so what can we do about it? Here is a solution: When the keys are of type strings use my Scalable Parallel HashList or my Scalable Parallel Varfiler in combination with my Skiplist , so when you insert, you insert in both of them, and when you delete you delete in both of them and when you search for a key , you search for it in my Scalable Parallel HashList or my Scalable Parallel Varfiler, and when you want to get the sorted list you can get it easily from the parallel skiplist above.. this way you can get both of the carracteristic of my scalable Hashtable and the carracteristic of my Parallel Skiplist. But when you are using numbers, you can simply use a my parallel skiplist above and you have to not worry about scalability , because when you are using numbers since the compare function of two number that you find on a Parallel Hahtable or a Parallel Skiplist takes very few CPU cycles , so it will not get a good scalability. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Aug 03 03:53PM -0700 Hello, User-Level Implementations of Read-Copy Update Read more here: https://www.efficios.com/pub/rcu/urcu-main.pdf Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.programming.threads+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No comments:
Post a Comment