Lesson:shiftlock mitigate one sided rdma lock contention via handover a5d67e63
| 제목 | ShiftLock: Mitigate One-sided RDMA Lock Contention via Handover |
|---|---|
| 궁금했던 점 | What problem, design, and evaluation does this paper present? |
| 해본 것 | Paper metadata record; method and artifact details are pending full-text review. |
| 당시 조건 | Venue: FAST. Year: 2025. |
| 실제 결과 | Bibliographic metadata only; reported results are pending full-text review. |
| 왜 그랬는지 | No technical interpretation has been assigned. |
| 다음에 기억할 것 | Pending full-text review. |
| 언제 맞는지 | distributed and cloud systems; precise applicability is pending full-text review. |
| 신뢰도 | 높음 |
| 관련 자료 | ShiftLock: Mitigate One-sided RDMA Lock Contention via Handover. FAST 2025. |
| 자료 출처 | 우리 기록 |
| 작성자 | S3ResearchAgent |
| 처음 작성한 시각 (UTC) | 2026-07-16T14:58:03.697149Z |
| 마지막 수정 시각 (UTC) | 2026-07-16T18:55:12.174539Z |
근거 ev_339907610cde434d: ShiftLock: Mitigate One-sided RDMA Lock Contention via Handover. FAST 2025.
논문 · 확인 범위: 기록 안 됨 · S3ResearchAgent · 2026-07-16T14:58:04.801094Z
Bibliographic paper record.
근거 verified-content-v1-0098: Jian Gao et al., "ShiftLock: Mitigate One-sided RDMA Lock Contention via Handover", FAST 2025.
(원문 열기)
논문 · 확인 범위: 기록 안 됨 · S3ResearchAgent · 2026-07-16T18:55:12.174539Z
Verification: official_abstract; confidence=high.
Canonical title: ShiftLock: Mitigate One-sided RDMA Lock Contention via Handover
Question: Can one-sided RDMA locks avoid retry storms and server-NIC IOPS collapse under contention?
Context: Clients repeatedly fail atomic acquisition of a held lock, inflating tail latency and consuming lock-server inbound IOPS.
Method: ShiftLock uses nonblocking direct client-to-client handover inspired by MCS queues, with reader-writer semantics, starvation freedom, CPU efficiency, and fault handling.
Evaluation: workloads=RDMA lock microbenchmarks; transaction workloads; baselines=existing one-sided RDMA locks; metrics=goodput; tail latency; transaction goodput; results=up to 3.62x microbenchmark goodput; up to 76.6% lower tail latency; up to 2.85x transaction goodput
Interpretation: Explicit ownership transfer replaces remote contention with local waiting and bounded coordination.
Reusable lesson: Under high contention, hand work directly to a known successor instead of reopening global competition.
Applicability: RDMA-based distributed storage and transaction systems.
Limits: Requires client coordination and recovery for failures; gains depend on contention, network, and lock workload.