Bender, Michael A., Berry, Jonathan W., Johnson, Rob, Kroeger, Thomas M., McCauley, Samuel, Phillips, Cynthia A., Simon, Bertrand, Singh, Shikha, Zage, David.
2016.

Anti-Persistence on Persistent Storage: History-Independent Sparse Tables and Dictionaries. Proceedings of the 35th ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGAI Symposium on Principles of Database Systems. :289–302.

We present history-independent alternatives to a B-tree, the primary indexing data structure used in databases. A data structure is history independent (HI) if it is impossible to deduce any information by examining the bit representation of the data structure that is not already available through the API. We show how to build a history-independent cache-oblivious B-tree and a history-independent external-memory skip list. One of the main contributions is a data structure we build on the way–-a history-independent packed-memory array (PMA). The PMA supports efficient range queries, one of the most important operations for answering database queries. Our HI PMA matches the asymptotic bounds of prior non-HI packed-memory arrays and sparse tables. Specifically, a PMA maintains a dynamic set of elements in sorted order in a linear-sized array. Inserts and deletes take an amortized O(log2 N) element moves with high probability. Simple experiments with our implementation of HI PMAs corroborate our theoretical analysis. Comparisons to regular PMAs give preliminary indications that the practical cost of adding history-independence is not too large. Our HI cache-oblivious B-tree bounds match those of prior non-HI cache-oblivious B-trees. Searches take O(logB N) I/Os; inserts and deletes take O((log2 N)/B+ logB N) amortized I/Os with high probability; and range queries returning k elements take O(logB N + k/B) I/Os. Our HI external-memory skip list achieves optimal bounds with high probability, analogous to in-memory skip lists: O(logB N) I/Os for point queries and amortized O(logB N) I/Os for inserts/deletes. Range queries returning k elements run in O(logB N + k/B) I/Os. In contrast, the best possible high-probability bounds for inserting into the folklore B-skip list, which promotes elements with probability 1/B, is just Theta(log N) I/Os. This is no better than the bounds one gets from running an in-memory skip list in external memory.

Bender, Michael A., Demaine, Erik D., Ebrahimi, Roozbeh, Fineman, Jeremy T., Johnson, Rob, Lincoln, Andrea, Lynch, Jayson, McCauley, Samuel.
2016.

Cache-Adaptive Analysis. Proceedings of the 28th ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures. :135–144.

Memory efficiency and locality have substantial impact on the performance of programs, particularly when operating on large data sets. Thus, memory- or I/O-efficient algorithms have received significant attention both in theory and practice. The widespread deployment of multicore machines, however, brings new challenges. Specifically, since the memory (RAM) is shared across multiple processes, the effective memory-size allocated to each process fluctuates over time. This paper presents techniques for designing and analyzing algorithms in a cache-adaptive setting, where the RAM available to the algorithm changes over time. These techniques make analyzing algorithms in the cache-adaptive model almost as easy as in the external memory, or DAM model. Our techniques enable us to analyze a wide variety of algorithms — Master-Method-style algorithms, Akra-Bazzi-style algorithms, collections of mutually recursive algorithms, and algorithms, such as FFT, that break problems of size N into subproblems of size Theta(Nc). We demonstrate the effectiveness of these techniques by deriving several results: 1. We give a simple recipe for determining whether common divide-and-conquer cache-oblivious algorithms are optimally cache adaptive. 2. We show how to bound an algorithm's non-optimality. We give a tight analysis showing that a class of cache-oblivious algorithms is a logarithmic factor worse than optimal. 3. We show the generality of our techniques by analyzing the cache-oblivious FFT algorithm, which is not covered by the above theorems. Nonetheless, the same general techniques can show that it is at most O(loglog N) away from optimal in the cache adaptive setting, and that this bound is tight. These general theorems give concrete results about several algorithms that could not be analyzed using earlier techniques. For example, our results apply to Fast Fourier Transform, matrix multiplication, Jacobi Multipass Filter, and cache-oblivious dynamic-programming algorithms, such as Longest Common Subsequence and Edit Distance. Our results also give algorithm designers clear guidelines for creating optimally cache-adaptive algorithms.