Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies highlight that traditional transaction processing systems utilize the micro-architectural features of modern processors very poorly. L1 instruction cache and long-latency data misses dominate execution time. As a result, more than half of the execution cycles are wasted on memory stalls. Previous works on reducing stall time aim at improving locality through either hardware or software techniques. However, exploiting hardware resources based on the hints given by the software-side has not been widely studied for data management systems. In this paper, we observe that, independently of their high-level functionality, transactions running in parallel on a multicore system execute actions chosen from a limited sub-set of predefined database operations. Therefore, we initially perform a memory characterization study of modern transaction processing systems using standardized benchmarks. The analysis demonstrates that same-type transactions exhibit at most 6% overlap in their data footprints whereas there is up to 98% overlap in instructions. Based on the findings, we design ADDICT, a transaction scheduling mechanism that aims at maximizing the instruction cache locality. ADDICT determines the most frequent actions of database operations, whose instruction footprint can fit in an L1 instruction cache, and assigns a core to execute each of these actions. Then, it schedules each action on its corresponding core. Our prototype implementation of ADDICT reduces L1 instruction misses by 85% and the long latency data misses by 20%. As a result, ADDICT leads up to a 50% reduction in the total execution time for the evaluated workloads.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.048 | 0.028 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".