MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388620459 · doi:10.1145/3617336

OptiQL: Robust Optimistic Locking for Memory-Optimized Indexes

2023· article· en· W4388620459 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Management of Data · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLock (firearm)Robustness (evolution)Multi-core processorParallel computingByteDistributed computingMutual exclusionOperating systemComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern memory-optimized indexes often use optimistic locks for concurrent accesses. Read operations can proceed optimistically without taking the lock, greatly improving performance on multicore CPUs. But this is at the cost of robustness against contention where many threads contend on a small set of locks, causing excessive cacheline invalidation, interconnect traffic and eventually performance collapse. Yet existing solutions often sacrifice desired properties such as compact 8-byte lock size and fairness among lock requesters. This paper presents optimistic queuing lock (OptiQL), a new optimistic lock for database indexing to solve this problem. OptiQL extends the classic MCS lock---a fair, compact and robust mutual exclusion lock---with optimistic read capabilities for index workloads to achieve both robustness and high performance while maintaining various desirable properties. Evaluation using memory-optimized B+-trees on a 40-core, dual-socket server shows that OptiQL matches existing optimistic locks for read operations, while avoiding performance collapse under high contention.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0110.007
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.102
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it