Changeset 20ffcf3 for doc/proposals/concurrency/text/future.tex

Timestamp:

Nov 13, 2017, 10:45:32 AM (6 years ago)

Author:

Thierry Delisle <tdelisle@…>

Branches:

ADT, aaron-thesis, arm-eh, ast-experimental, cleanup-dtors, deferred_resn, demangler, enum, forall-pointer-decay, jacob/cs343-translation, jenkins-sandbox, master, new-ast, new-ast-unique-expr, new-env, no_list, persistent-indexer, pthread-emulation, qualifiedEnum, resolv-new, with_gc

Children:

b3ffb61

Parents:

6d2386e

Message:

Commit after new draft

File:

• doc/proposals/concurrency/text/future.tex (modified) (3 diffs)

doc/proposals/concurrency/text/future.tex

@@ -6 +6 @@
 
 \section{Flexible Scheduling} \label{futur:sched}
-
+An important part of concurrency is scheduling. Different scheduling algorithm can affact peformance (both in terms of average and variation). However, no single scheduler is optimal for all workloads and therefore there is value in being able to change the scheduler for given programs. One solution is to offer various tweaking options to users, allowing the scheduler to be adjusted the to requirements of the workload. However, in order to be truly flexible, it would be interesting to allow users to add arbitrary data and arbirary scheduling algorithms to the scheduler. For example, a web server could attach Type-of-Service information to threads and have a ``ToS aware'' scheduling algorithm tailored to this specific web server. This path of flexible schedulers will be explored for \CFA.
 
 \section{Non-Blocking IO} \label{futur:nbio}
@@ -12 +12 @@
 However, many modern workloads are not bound on computation but on IO operations, an common case being webservers and XaaS (anything as a service). These type of workloads often require significant engineering around amortising costs of blocking IO operations. While improving throughtput of these operations is outside what \CFA can do as a language, it can help users to make better use of the CPU time otherwise spent waiting on IO operations. The current trend is to use asynchronous programming using tools like callbacks and/or futurs and promises\cit. However, while these are valid solutions, they lead to code that is harder to read and maintain because it is much less linear
 
-
-
 \section{Other concurrency tools} \label{futur:tools}
-
+While monitors offer a flexible and powerful concurent core for \CFA, other concurrency tools are also necessary for a complete multi-paradigm concurrency package. Example of such tools can include simple locks and condition variables, futures and promises, and executors. These additional features are useful when monitors offer a level of abstraction which is indaquate for certain tasks.
 
 \section{Implicit threading} \label{futur:implcit}
@@ -103 +101 @@
 \end{figure}
 
-Implicit parallelism is a general solution and therefore is
-
-\section{Multiple Paradigms} \label{futur:paradigms}
+Implicit parallelism is a general solution and therefore has its limitations. However, it is a quick and simple approach to parallelism which may very well be sufficient for smaller applications and reduces the amount of boiler-plate that is needed to start benefiting from parallelism in modern CPUs.
 
 
-\section{Transactions} \label{futur:transaction}
-Concurrency and parallelism is still a very active field that strongly benefits from hardware advances. As such certain features that aren't necessarily mature enough in their current state could become relevant in the lifetime of \CFA.