Antony L. Hosking and J. Eliot B. Moss. Lightweight write detection and checkpointing for fine-grained persistence. Technical Report 95-084, Purdue University, 1995. Home/Search Document Details and Download
Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Mostly-Copying Reachability-Based Orthogonal Persistence - Hosking, Chen (1999) (2 citations) Self-citation (Hosking) (Correct)
....and insertion operations of the OO7 benchmark. The expense of the trapbased barrier mechanism for PM3 appears to be tolerable, at least for the large fault and update granularity of 8 Kbyte pages. Nevertheless, with evidence that large granularities can adversely impact on fetch and commit times [44, 45, 46, 38], we plan also to explore software techniques for finer granularities by having the compiler attach explicit software barriers to object accesses, with compiler optimizations to remove those that are redundant. We also plan to explore the integration of mostly copying persistence with buffer ....
HOSKING,A.L.,AND MOSS, J. E. B. Lightweight write detection and checkpointing for fine-grained persistence. Tech. Rep. 95-084, Department of Computer Sciences, Purdue University, Dec. 1995.
Residency Check Elimination for Object-Oriented Persistent.. - Hosking (1997) Self-citation (Hosking) (Correct)
....faulting entirely transparent to compiled code; these have only one representation: virtual memory pointers to apparently resident objects. However, there is evidence to suggest that such totally transparent schemes do not always offer the best performance [HMS92, HM93a, HM93b, HBM93, Hos95, HM95] Thus, multiple representations arise for references to resident objects (which can be used without causing an object fault) versus references to non resident objects, along with explicit residency checks to distinguish them. Efficient implementation of residency checks is one key to ....
Antony L. Hosking and J. Eliot B. Moss. Lightweight write detection and checkpointing for fine-grained persistence. Technical Report 95-084, Department of Computer Sciences, Purdue University, December 1995.
Residency Check Elimination for Object-Oriented Persistent.. - Hosking (1996) Self-citation (Hosking) (Correct)
....have only one representation: virtual memory pointers to apparently resident objects. However, there is evidence to suggest that such totally transparent schemes do not always offer the best performance [Hosking et al. 1992; Hosking and Moss 1993a; Hosking and Moss 1993b; Hosking et al. 1993; Hosking 1995; Hosking and Moss 1995] Thus, multiple representations arise for references to resident objects (which can be used without causing an object fault) versus references to non resident objects, along with explicit residency checks to distinguish them. Efficient implementation of residency checks ....
....one representation: virtual memory pointers to apparently resident objects. However, there is evidence to suggest that such totally transparent schemes do not always offer the best performance [Hosking et al. 1992; Hosking and Moss 1993a; Hosking and Moss 1993b; Hosking et al. 1993; Hosking 1995; Hosking and Moss 1995]. Thus, multiple representations arise for references to resident objects (which can be used without causing an object fault) versus references to non resident objects, along with explicit residency checks to distinguish them. Efficient implementation of residency checks is one key to ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
HOSKING, A. L. AND MOSS, J. E. B. 1995. Lightweight write detection and checkpointing for fine-grained persistence. Submitted for publication. http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/hosking/papers/checkpoint.ps.gz.
Approaches to Adding Persistence to Java - Moss, Hosking (1996) (12 citations) Self-citation (Hosking Moss) (Correct)
....techniques into the categories of (source) preprocessors, object, i.e. byte code) postprocessors, and enhanced virtual machines. This position paper is essentially an elaboration and expansion of Cattell s categories. 8 [Hosking and Moss 1993a; Hosking and Moss 1993b; Hosking et al. 1993; Hosking 1995; Hosking and Moss 1995] level and internal to the interpreter (cf. Hosking 1996] as well as a range of interpreter implementation choices (byte code, threaded code, native code, various object faulting techniques, various update detection techniques) We anticipate using the UMass Language ....
....into the categories of (source) preprocessors, object, i.e. byte code) postprocessors, and enhanced virtual machines. This position paper is essentially an elaboration and expansion of Cattell s categories. 8 [Hosking and Moss 1993a; Hosking and Moss 1993b; Hosking et al. 1993; Hosking 1995; Hosking and Moss 1995] level and internal to the interpreter (cf. Hosking 1996] as well as a range of interpreter implementation choices (byte code, threaded code, native code, various object faulting techniques, various update detection techniques) We anticipate using the UMass Language Independent Garbage ....
HOSKING, A. L. AND MOSS, J. E. B. 1995. Lightweight write detection and checkpointing for fine-grained persistence.
the Garbage Collection Bibliography - Richard Jones (2003) (Correct)
No context found.
Antony L. Hosking and J. Eliot B. Moss. Lightweight write detection and checkpointing for fine-grained persistence. Technical Report 95-084, Purdue University, 1995.
Termination and Rollback in Language-Based Systems - Rudys (2002) (Correct)
No context found.
A. L. Hosking and J. E. B. Moss. Lightweight write detection and checkpointing for fine-grained persistence. Technical Report 95-084, Department of Computer Sciences, Purdue University, Dec. 1995.
Transactional Rollback for Language-Based Systems - Rudys, Wallach (2002) (5 citations) (Correct)
No context found.
A. L. Hosking and J. E. B. Moss. Lightweight write detection and checkpointing for fine-grained persistence. Technical Report 95084, Department of Computer Sciences, Purdue University, Dec. 1995.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC