Upgrade to Pro
— share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …
Speaker Deck
Features
Speaker Deck
PRO
Sign in
Sign up for free
Search
Search
Ctrie Data Structure
Search
Aleksandar Prokopec
February 28, 2012
Programming
260
0
Share
Ctrie Data Structure
The description of the Ctrie data structure from PPoPP 2012.
Aleksandar Prokopec
February 28, 2012
More Decks by Aleksandar Prokopec
See All by Aleksandar Prokopec
ScalaMeter in 2014
axel22
0
370
Reactive Collections
axel22
0
200
A Reactive 3D Game Engine in Scala
axel22
4
8.3k
ScalaBlitz
axel22
0
220
Work-stealing Tree Scheduler
axel22
1
91
ScalaMeter
axel22
0
160
Parallel Collections Overview
axel22
0
130
Introduction to Scala
axel22
2
320
Other Decks in Programming
See All in Programming
SREに優しいTerraform構成 modulesとstateの組み方
hiyanger
2
170
GoogleCloudとterraform完全に理解した
terisuke
1
200
ハーネスエンジニアリングにどう向き合うか 〜ルールファイルを超えて開発プロセスを設計する〜 / How to approach harness engineering
rkaga
28
22k
Cache-moi si tu peux : patterns et pièges du cache en production - Devoxx France 2026 - Conférence
slecache
0
350
過去のレビュー知見をSkillsで資産化した話
pkshadeck
PRO
1
1.9k
「OSSがあるなら自作するな」は AI時代も正しいか ── Build vs Adopt の新しい判断基準
kumorn5s
7
2.6k
継続的な負荷検証を目指して
pyama86
3
1.2k
[RubyKaigi 2026] Require Hooks
palkan
1
320
決定論 vs 確率論:Gemini 3 FlashとTF-IDFを組み合わせた「法規判定エンジン」の構築
shukob
0
160
運転動画を検索可能にする〜Cosmos-Embed1とDatabricks Vector Searchで〜/cosmos-embed1-databricks-vector-search
studio_graph
3
920
Liberating Ruby's Parser from Lexer Hacks
ydah
2
2.7k
エラー処理の温故知新 / history of error handling technic
ryotanakaya
7
1.9k
Featured
See All Featured
Practical Tips for Bootstrapping Information Extraction Pipelines
honnibal
25
1.9k
svc-hook: hooking system calls on ARM64 by binary rewriting
retrage
2
250
VelocityConf: Rendering Performance Case Studies
addyosmani
333
25k
Why Your Marketing Sucks and What You Can Do About It - Sophie Logan
marketingsoph
0
140
We Analyzed 250 Million AI Search Results: Here's What I Found
joshbly
1
1.3k
Technical Leadership for Architectural Decision Making
baasie
3
360
Mozcon NYC 2025: Stop Losing SEO Traffic
samtorres
0
230
<Decoding/> the Language of Devs - We Love SEO 2024
nikkihalliwell
1
210
The Mindset for Success: Future Career Progression
greggifford
PRO
0
330
Why Our Code Smells
bkeepers
PRO
340
58k
We Are The Robots
honzajavorek
0
230
DBのスキルで生き残る技術 - AI時代におけるテーブル設計の勘所
soudai
PRO
65
54k
Transcript
Concurrent Tries with Efficient Non-blocking Snapshots Aleksandar Prokopec Phil Bagwell
Martin Odersky École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne Nathan Bronson Stanford
Motivation val numbers = getNumbers() // compute square roots numbers
foreach { entry => x = entry.root n = entry.number entry.root = 0.5 * (x + n / x) if (abs(entry.root - x) < eps) numbers.remove(entry) }
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT)
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT) 0 = 0000002
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT) 0
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT) 0 16 = 0100002
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT) 0 16
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT) 0 16 4 = 0001002
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT) 16 0 4 = 0001002
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT) 16 0 4
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT) 16 0 4 12 =
0011002
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT) 16 0 4 12 =
0011002
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT) 16 0 4 12
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT) 16 33 0 4 12
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT) 16 33 0 4 12
48
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT) 16 0 4 12 48
33 37
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT) 16 4 12 48 33
37 0 3
Hash Array Mapped Tries (HAMT) 4 12 16 20 25
33 37 0 1 8 9 3 48 57
Immutable HAMT • used as immutable maps in functional languages
4 12 16 20 25 33 37 0 1 8 9 3
Immutable HAMT • updates rewrite path from root to leaf
4 12 16 20 25 33 37 0 1 8 9 3 4 12 8 9 11 insert(11)
Immutable HAMT • updates rewrite path from root to leaf
4 12 16 20 25 33 37 0 1 8 9 3 4 12 8 9 11 insert(11) efficient updates - logk (n)
Node compression 48 57 48 57 1 0 1 0
48 57 1 0 1 0 48 57 10 BITPOP(((1 << ((hc >> lev) & 1F)) – 1) & BMP)
Node compression 48 57 48 57 1 0 1 0
48 57 1 0 1 0 48 57 10 48 57
Ctrie Can mutable HAMT be modified to be thread-safe?
Ctrie insert 4 9 12 16 20 25 33 37
0 1 3 48 57 17 = 0100012
Ctrie insert 4 9 12 16 20 25 33 37
0 1 3 48 57 17 = 0100012 16 17 1) allocate
Ctrie insert 4 9 12 20 25 33 37 0
1 3 48 57 17 = 0100012 16 17 2) CAS
Ctrie insert 4 9 12 20 25 33 37 0
1 3 48 57 17 = 0100012 16 17
Ctrie insert 4 9 12 33 37 0 1 3
48 57 18 = 0100102 16 17 20 25
Ctrie insert 4 9 12 33 37 0 1 3
48 57 18 = 0100102 16 17 20 25 1) allocate 16 17 18
Ctrie insert 4 9 12 33 37 0 1 3
48 57 18 = 0100102 20 25 2) CAS 16 17 18
Ctrie insert 4 9 12 33 37 0 1 3
48 57 18 = 0100102 20 25 2) CAS 16 17 18 Unless…
Ctrie insert 4 9 12 33 37 0 1 3
48 57 18 = 0100102 16 17 20 25 T1-1) allocate 16 17 18 Unless… 28 = 0111002 T1 T2
Ctrie insert 4 9 12 0 1 3 18 =
0100102 16 17 20 25 T1-1) allocate 16 17 18 Unless… 28 = 0111002 T1 T2 20 25 28 T2-1) allocate
Ctrie insert 4 9 12 0 1 3 18 =
0100102 16 17 20 25 T1-1) allocate 16 17 18 28 = 0111002 T1 T2 20 25 28 T2-2) CAS
Ctrie insert 4 9 12 0 1 3 18 =
0100102 16 17 20 25 T1-2) CAS 16 17 18 28 = 0111002 T1 T2 20 25 28 T2-2) CAS
Ctrie insert 4 9 12 0 1 3 18 =
0100102 16 17 20 25 16 17 18 28 = 0111002 T1 T2 20 25 28 Lost insert!
Ctrie insert – 2nd attempt 4 9 12 0 1
3 16 17 20 25 Solution: I-nodes
Ctrie insert – 2nd attempt 4 9 12 0 1
3 16 17 20 25 18 = 0100102 28 = 0111002 T1 T2
Ctrie insert – 2nd attempt 4 9 12 0 1
3 16 17 T1 T2 20 25 18 = 0100102 28 = 0111002 16 17 18 20 25 28 T2-1) allocate T1-1) allocate
Ctrie insert – 2nd attempt 4 9 12 0 1
3 16 17 T1 T2 20 25 16 17 18 20 25 28 T2-2) CAS T1-2) CAS
Ctrie insert – 2nd attempt 4 9 12 0 1
3 16 17 18 20 25 28
Ctrie insert – 2nd attempt 4 9 12 0 1
3 16 17 18 20 25 28 Idea: once added to the Ctrie, I-nodes remain present.
Ctrie insert – 2nd attempt 4 9 12 0 1
3 16 17 18 20 25 28 Remove operation supported as well - details in the paper.
Ctrie size 4 9 12 0 1 3 16 17
18 20 25 28
Ctrie size 4 9 12 0 1 3 16 17
18 20 25 28 size = 0
Ctrie size 4 9 12 0 1 3 16 17
18 20 25 28 size = 0
Ctrie size 4 9 12 0 1 3 16 17
18 20 25 28 size = 0
Ctrie size 4 9 12 0 1 3 16 17
18 20 25 28 size = 0
Ctrie size 4 9 12 0 1 3 16 17
18 20 25 28 size = 1
Ctrie size 4 9 12 0 1 3 16 17
18 20 25 28 size = 2
Ctrie size 4 9 12 0 1 3 16 17
18 20 25 28 size = 3
Ctrie size 4 9 12 0 1 3 16 17
18 20 25 28 size = 5
Ctrie size 4 9 12 0 1 3 16 17
18 20 25 28 size = 5 actual size = 12
Ctrie size 4 9 12 0 1 3 16 17
18 20 25 28 size = 5 0 1 actual size = 12
Ctrie size 4 9 12 0 1 3 16 17
18 20 25 28 size = 5 0 1 CAS actual size = 11
Ctrie size 4 9 12 16 17 18 20 25
28 size = 5 0 1 actual size = 11
Ctrie size 4 9 12 16 17 18 20 25
28 size = 6 0 1 actual size = 11
Ctrie size 4 9 12 16 17 18 20 25
28 size = 6 0 1 actual size = 11 19
Ctrie size 4 9 12 16 17 18 20 25
28 size = 6 0 1 actual size = 11 16 17 18 19
Ctrie size 4 9 12 16 17 18 20 25
28 size = 6 0 1 actual size = 12 16 17 18 19 CAS
Ctrie size 4 9 12 20 25 28 size =
6 0 1 actual size = 12 16 17 18 19
Ctrie size 4 9 12 20 25 28 size =
6 0 1 actual size = 12 16 17 18 19
Ctrie size 4 9 12 20 25 28 size =
7 0 1 actual size = 9 16 17 18 19
Ctrie size 4 9 12 20 25 28 size =
8 0 1 actual size = 12 16 17 18 19
Ctrie size 4 9 12 20 25 28 size =
9 0 1 actual size = 12 16 17 18 19
Ctrie size 4 9 12 20 25 28 size =
10 0 1 actual size = 12 16 17 18 19
Ctrie size 4 9 12 20 25 28 size =
11 0 1 actual size = 12 16 17 18 19
Ctrie size 4 9 12 20 25 28 size =
12 0 1 actual size = 12 16 17 18 19
Ctrie size 4 9 12 20 25 28 size =
13 0 1 actual size = 12 16 17 18 19
Ctrie size 4 9 12 20 25 28 size =
13 0 1 actual size = 12 16 17 18 19 But the size was never 13!
Global state information 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 • size • find • filter • iterator
Global state information 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 • size • find • filter • iterator snapshot
Snapshot using locks 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19
Snapshot using locks 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 • copy expensive
Snapshot using locks 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 • copy expensive • not lock-free
Snapshot using locks 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 • copy expensive • not lock-free • can insert or remove remain lock-free? 0 1 2 CAS
Snapshot using locks 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 • copy expensive • not lock-free • can insert or remove remain lock-free? 0 1 2 CAS
Snapshot using logs 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 • keep a linked list of previous values in each I-node
Snapshot using logs 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 0 1 2 • keep a linked list of previous values in each I-node
Snapshot using logs 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 • keep a linked list of previous values in each I-node • when is it safe to delete old entries? 0 1 2
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 root
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 root
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 snapshot! root
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 snapshot! #2 root 1) create new I-node at #2
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 snapshot! #2 root 2) set snapshot snapshot #1
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 snapshot! #2 root 3) CAS root to new I-node snapshot #1
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 subsequent insert #2 root snapshot #1 2
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 subsequent insert #2 root snapshot #1 2 generation #2 - ok!
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 subsequent insert #2 root snapshot #1 2 generation #1 not ok, too old!
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 subsequent insert #2 root 1) create updated node at #2 snapshot #1 2 #2 #2
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 subsequent insert #2 root 2) CAS to the updated node snapshot #1 2 #2 #2
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 subsequent insert #2 root snapshot #1 2 #2 #2 #1 too old!
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 subsequent insert #2 root snapshot #1 2 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 1) create updated node at #2
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 subsequent insert #2 root snapshot #1 2 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 2) CAS
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 subsequent insert #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 finally, create a new leaf and CAS
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 another insert #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 3
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 another insert #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 0 1 2 3
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 But... this won't really work... why? #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 0 1 2 3
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 0 1 2 3 T2: remove 19 16 17 18
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 0 1 2 3 T2: remove 19 16 17 18 CAS
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 0 1 2 3 T2: remove 19 16 17 18 CAS How to fail this last CAS?
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 0 1 2 3 T2: remove 19 16 17 18 DCAS How to fail this last CAS? DCAS
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 0 1 2 3 T2: remove 19 16 17 18 How to fail this last CAS? DCAS - software based DCAS
Snapshot using immutability 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 0 1 2 3 T2: remove 19 16 17 18 How to fail this last CAS? DCAS - software based ...creates intermediate objects DCAS
GCAS - generation-compare-and-swap 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 3 T2: remove 19 16 17 18 prev 1) set prev field
GCAS - generation-compare-and-swap 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 3 T2: remove 19 16 17 18 prev 2) CAS
GCAS - generation-compare-and-swap 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 3 T2: remove 19 16 17 18 prev 3) read root generation
GCAS - generation-compare-and-swap 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 3 16 17 18 prev 4) if root generation changed CAS prev to FailedNode(prev) FN
GCAS - generation-compare-and-swap 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 3 16 17 18 prev 4) if root generation changed CAS prev to FailedNode(prev) FN
GCAS - generation-compare-and-swap 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 3 16 17 18 prev 5) CAS to previous value FN
GCAS - generation-compare-and-swap 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 3 16 17 18 prev 4) if root generation unchanged CAS prev to null
GCAS - generation-compare-and-swap 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 3 16 17 18 4) if root generation unchanged CAS prev to null
GCAS - generation-compare-and-swap 4 9 12 20 25 28 0
1 16 17 18 19 #1 #1 #1 #1 #1 #2 root snapshot #1 #2 #2 4 9 12 #2 0 1 2 3 1) Replace all CAS with GCAS 2) Replace all READ with GCAS_READ (which checks if prev field is null)
Snapshot-based iterator def iterator = if (isSnapshot) new Iterator(root) else
snapshot().iterator()
Snapshot-based size def size = { val sz = 0
val it = iterator while (it.hasNext) sz += 1 sz }
Snapshot-based size def size = { val sz = 0
val it = iterator while (it.hasNext) sz += 1 sz } Above is O(n). But, by caching size in nodes - amortized O(logk n)! (see source code)
Snapshot-based atomic clear def clear() = { val or =
READ(root) val nr = new INode(new Gen) if (!CAS(root, or, nr)) clear() } (roughly)
Evaluation - quad core i7
Evaluation – UltraSPARC T2
Evaluation – 4x 8-core i7
Evaluation – snapshot
Conclusion • snapshots are linearizable and lock-free • snapshots take
constant time • snapshots are horizontally scalable • snapshots add a non-significant overhead to the algorithm if they aren't used • the approach may be applicable to tree-based lock-free data-structures in general (intuition)
Thank you!