Instead Of Storing Shared Structures In Shared Memory, An Alternative

1.	Instead Of Storing Shared Structures In Shared Memory, An Alternative Architecture Would Be To Store Them In The Local Memory Of A Special Process, And Access The Shared Data By Inter Process Communication With The Process. What Would Be The Drawback Of Such An Architecture?
Answer» The DRAWBACKS would be that TWO interprocess messages would be required to acquire locks, ONE for the request and one to confirm grant. Interprocess communication is much more expensive than memory access, so the cost of locking would increase. The process storing the shared structures could ALSO become a bottleneck. The benefit of this alternative is that the LOCK table is protected better from erroneous updates since only one process can access it. The drawbacks would be that two interprocess messages would be required to acquire locks, one for the request and one to confirm grant. Interprocess communication is much more expensive than memory access, so the cost of locking would increase. The process storing the shared structures could also become a bottleneck. The benefit of this alternative is that the lock table is protected better from erroneous updates since only one process can access it.

Instead Of Storing Shared Structures In Shared Memory, An Alternative Architecture Would Be To Store Them In The Local Memory Of A Special Process, And Access The Shared Data By Inter Process Communication With The Process. What Would Be The Drawback Of Such An Architecture?

Answer»

The DRAWBACKS would be that TWO interprocess messages would be required to acquire locks, ONE for the request and one to confirm grant. Interprocess communication is much more expensive than memory access, so the cost of locking would increase. The process storing the shared structures could ALSO become a bottleneck. The benefit of this alternative is that the LOCK table is protected better from erroneous updates since only one process can access it.

The drawbacks would be that two interprocess messages would be required to acquire locks, one for the request and one to confirm grant. Interprocess communication is much more expensive than memory access, so the cost of locking would increase. The process storing the shared structures could also become a bottleneck. The benefit of this alternative is that the lock table is protected better from erroneous updates since only one process can access it.

Instead Of Storing Shared Structures In Shared Memory, An Alternative Architecture Would Be To Store Them In The Local Memory Of A Special Process, And Access The Shared Data By Inter Process Communication With The Process. What Would Be The Drawback Of Such An Architecture?

Discussion

No Comment Found

Related InterviewSolutions

Reply to Comment