Monday, June 2, 2014

Difference Between Lock Algorithm and Lock-Free Algorithm

Lock Algorithm:

In a lock algorithm, threads use locks (e.g., mutexes or semaphores) to synchronize access to shared resources. When a thread acquires a lock, other threads that try to acquire the same lock are blocked until the lock is released.

  • Blocking: If a thread has a lock on a shared resource, other threads that need the same resource must wait for the lock to be released.
  • Convoying: When one thread is blocked due to lock contention, it may cause other threads to also wait for it (convoying), leading to performance degradation.

Example of a Lock Algorithm scenario:

  • Thread 1 holds a lock and is running.
  • Thread 3 and Thread 4 need the same lock to proceed, but they are forced to wait for Thread 1 to release it. If Thread 1 gets excluded from CPU scheduling due to convoying (e.g., the OS gives CPU time to another thread), Thread 3 and Thread 4 will be stuck waiting indefinitely until Thread 1 finishes, leading to priority inversion or a performance bottleneck.

Lock-Free Algorithm:

A lock-free algorithm is designed such that at least one thread will always make progress within a bounded amount of time, regardless of the number of threads and their scheduling.

  • Non-blocking: Even if one thread is blocked (e.g., due to convoying), other threads will continue to make progress. It uses atomic operations (like CAS—Compare-and-Swap) to avoid the need for traditional locks.
  • Concurrency: Lock-free algorithms allow multiple threads to work concurrently without waiting for other threads to release locks, which increases parallelism and overall system throughput.

Example of a Lock-Free Algorithm scenario:

  • Even if Thread 1 is blocked due to convoying (for example, excluded from CPU scheduling), Thread 3 and Thread 4 can still continue their execution and complete their tasks within the designated time frame.

Benefits of Lock-Free Algorithms in Multi-Core or Multi-CPU Environments:

In systems where multiple threads need to perform read and write operations on shared data, lock-free algorithms are preferred for the following reasons:

  1. Priority Inversion: Lock-based algorithms can cause priority inversion if a higher-priority thread is waiting for a lock held by a lower-priority thread. This can delay high-priority tasks and cause unpredictable performance.

  2. Convoying: In a lock-based system, if one thread gets blocked, other threads that need to access the same resource might also become blocked, creating a convoy. This significantly reduces concurrency and harms performance.

  3. Improved Parallelism: Lock-free algorithms allow multiple threads to work in parallel without blocking each other. This improves the system’s ability to scale with multiple cores or CPUs.

Conclusion:

  • Lock-based algorithms introduce blocking, priority inversion, and convoying, which can degrade performance, especially in high-concurrency or multi-core systems.
  • Lock-free algorithms, by avoiding blocking and ensuring that at least one thread progresses within a fixed time, offer better performance, scalability, and efficiency, particularly when many threads are competing for access to shared data.

In high-performance computing, lock-free algorithms are often a better choice as they minimize contention and maximize parallelism, which is critical for systems with multiple processors or cores.