Ramine
12/6/2014 2:03:00 AM
Hello,
I have just read carefully what have wrote Chris M. Thomasson,
and he have just said that RCU have no memory barrier and no atomic
in the reader side, so it is costless on the reader side, and
he has said since my new algorithm uses atomics and memory barrier
on the reader side so it is slower than RCU , but i don't agree
with Chriss Thomasson, because what don't understand Chriss Thomasson is
that my new algorithm uses an hybrid algorithm of a distributed
algorithm and a sequential algorithm, the distributed algorithm makes
the atomics very very cheap in term of running time, and
the full memory barrier is still there on the reader side,
but what you have to understand that even though there is still
a full memory barrier on the reader side of my algorithm, this full
memory barrier belongs to the parallel part of the Amdahl's law, so it
is fully scalable on read-mostly scenarios and the GetCurrentProcessor()
functionof my algorithm is also part of the parallel part of the
Amdahl's law, so it is fully scalable on
read-mostly scenarios, that makes my new algorithm
a very well scalable algorithm on read-mostly scenarios on multicores,
so this is why i have told you that my new algorithm can replace
RCU because it is very well scalable on read mostly scenarios and
it beats Seqlock on some charateristics because it avoids
"starvation" and it avoids "livelock" on scenarios with more writers.
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.