Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Tudor David

dblp:70/9867 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
8ranked-venue papers
6as first author
0since 2021 · last 2018
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Systems, architecture and hardware · 6 · 4 first-authorSoftware engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3 · 3 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
3 papers
Memory systems · 50% Parallel and multicore computing · 42% Processor architecture and microarchitecture · 8%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Transaction processing and concurrency control · 100%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
3 papers
Concurrent programming · 100%

Topics — the 11 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Parallel and multicore computing
concurrent data structures
0.522018
Log-Free Concurrent Data Structures · USENIX ATC 2018
Asynchronized Concurrency: The Secret to Scaling Concurrent Search Data Structures · ASPLOS 2015
Concurrent programming
synchronization
0.422015
Asynchronized Concurrency: The Secret to Scaling Concurrent Search Data Structures · ASPLOS 2015
Everything you always wanted to know about synchronization but were afraid to ask · SOSP 2013
Transaction processing and concurrency control
concurrency control
0.312018
Locking Timestamps versus Locking Objects · PODC 2018
Transaction processing and concurrency control › concurrency control
locking
0.312018
Locking Timestamps versus Locking Objects · PODC 2018
Transaction processing and concurrency control › concurrency control
timestamp ordering
0.312018
Locking Timestamps versus Locking Objects · PODC 2018
Concurrent programming
concurrent data structures
0.312018
Log-Free Concurrent Data Structures · USENIX ATC 2018
Memory systems › non-volatile memory
log-free data structures
0.312018
Log-Free Concurrent Data Structures · USENIX ATC 2018
Memory systems
cache coherence
0.212013
Everything you always wanted to know about synchronization but were afraid to ask · SOSP 2013
Memory systems › cache coherence
cache coherence protocol
0.212013
Everything you always wanted to know about synchronization but were afraid to ask · SOSP 2013
Processor architecture and microarchitecture
many-core architecture
0.012013
Everything you always wanted to know about synchronization but were afraid to ask · SOSP 2013
Processor architecture and microarchitecture
multicore design
0.012013
Everything you always wanted to know about synchronization but were afraid to ask · SOSP 2013

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

performance benchmarking · 0.4lock-free synchronization · 0.4synchronization study · 0.3cache coherence protocol · 0.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2018 Locking Timestamps versus Locking Objects
Marcos K. Aguilera, Tudor David, Rachid Guerraoui, Junxiong Wang
PODC2
2018 Log-Free Concurrent Data Structures
Tudor David, Aleksandar Dragojevic, Rachid Guerraoui, Igor Zablotchi
USENIX ATC1
2016 Concurrent Search Data Structures Can Be Blocking and Practically Wait-Free
abstract
We argue that there is virtually no practical situation in which one should seek a "theoretically wait-free" algorithm at the expense of a state-of-the-art blocking algorithm in the case of search data structures: blocking algorithms are simple, fast, and can be made "practically wait-free". We draw this conclusion based on the most exhaustive study of blocking search data structures to date. We consider (a) different search data structures of different sizes, (b) numerous uniform and non-uniform workloads, representative of a wide range of practical scenarios, with different percentages of update operations, (c) with and without delayed threads, (d) on different hardware technologies, including processors providing HTM instructions. We explain our claim that blocking search data structures are practically wait-free through an analogy with the birthday paradox, revealing that, in state-of-the-art algorithms implementing such data structures, the probability of conflicts is extremely small. When conflicts occur as a result of context switches and interrupts, we show that HTM-based locks enable blocking algorithms to cope with them.
Tudor David, Rachid Guerraoui
SPAA1
2015 Asynchronized Concurrency: The Secret to Scaling Concurrent Search Data Structures
abstract
We introduce "asynchronized concurrency (ASCY)," a paradigm consisting of four complementary programming patterns. ASCY calls for the design of concurrent search data structures (CSDSs) to resemble that of their sequential counterparts. We argue that ASCY leads to implementations which are portably scalable: they scale across different types of hardware platforms, including single and multi-socket ones, for various classes of workloads, such as read-only and read-write, and according to different performance metrics, including throughput, latency, and energy. We substantiate our thesis through the most exhaustive evaluation of CSDSs to date, involving 6 platforms, 22 state-of-the-art CSDS algorithms, 10 re-engineered state-of-the-art CSDS algorithms following the ASCY patterns, and 2 new CSDS algorithms designed with ASCY in mind. We observe up to 30% improvements in throughput in the re-engineered algorithms, while our new algorithms out-perform the state-of-the-art alternatives.
Tudor David, Rachid Guerraoui, Vasileios Trigonakis
ASPLOS1
2014 Consensus inside
abstract
Scaling to a large number of cores with non-uniform communication latency and unpredictable response time may call for viewing a modern many-core architecture as a distributed system. In this view, the cores replicate shared data and ensure consistency among replicas through a message-passing based agreement protocol.
Tudor David, Rachid Guerraoui, Maysam Yabandeh
Middleware1
2013 Everything you always wanted to know about synchronization but were afraid to ask
abstract
This paper presents the most exhaustive study of synchronization to date. We span multiple layers, from hardware cache-coherence protocols up to high-level concurrent software. We do so on different types of architectures, from single-socket -- uniform and non-uniform -- to multi-socket -- directory and broadcast-based -- many-cores. We draw a set of observations that, roughly speaking, imply that scalability of synchronization is mainly a property of the hardware.
Tudor David, Rachid Guerraoui, Vasileios Trigonakis
SOSP1
2012 Scheduling streaming applications on a complex multicore platform
abstract
SUMMARY In this paper, we consider the problem of scheduling streaming applications described by complex task graphs on a heterogeneous multicore platform, the IBM QS 22 platform, embedding two STI Cell Broadband Engine processor. We first derive a complete computation and communication model of the platform on the basis of comprehensive benchmarks. Then we use this model to express the problem of maximizing the throughput of a streaming application on this platform. Although the problem is proven NP‐complete, we present an optimal solution based on mixed linear programming. We also propose simpler scheduling heuristics to compute mapping of the application task graph on the platform. We then come back to the platform and propose a scheduling software to deploy streaming applications on this platform. This allows us to thoroughly test our scheduling strategies on the real platform. We thus show that we are able to achieve a good speed‐up either with the mixed linear programming solution or using involved scheduling heuristics. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Tudor David, Mathias Jacquelin, Loris Marchal
Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp.1
2012 Biologically-inspired clustering of semantic Web services. Birds or ants intelligence?
abstract
SUMMARY The clustering and sorting behavior of ants, as well as the foraging behavior of birds in nature represented sources of inspiration for designing clustering methods applicable in computer science. This paper investigates how biologically‐inspired clustering methods can be adapted to cluster Semantic Web services aiming at the efficiency of the discovery process. The methods consider the semantic similarity between services as the main clustering criterion. To measure the semantic similarity between two services, we propose a matching method that evaluates the degree of match between the semantic description of the two services. We have tested the biologically‐inspired clustering methods on the SAWSDL service retrieval test collection (SAWSDL‐TC) benchmark, and we have comparatively evaluated their performance using the Dunn index and the Average‐Item Cluster Similarity metric, the latter being introduced in this paper. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Cristina Pop 0001, Viorica R. Chifu, Ioan Salomie, Mihaela Dînsoreanu, Tudor David, Vlad Acretoaie, Aliz Nagy, Ciprian Oprisa
Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp.5