ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS)
Parallel discrete-event simulation of FCFS stochastic queueing networks
PPEALS '88 Proceedings of the ACM/SIGPLAN conference on Parallel programming: experience with applications, languages and systems
PADS '93 Proceedings of the seventh workshop on Parallel and distributed simulation
Performance of a riskfree Time Warp operating system
PADS '93 Proceedings of the seventh workshop on Parallel and distributed simulation
Investigations in adaptive distributed simulation
PADS '94 Proceedings of the eighth workshop on Parallel and distributed simulation
A spectrum of options for parallel simulation
WSC '88 Proceedings of the 20th conference on Winter simulation
A unified distributed simulation system
WSC' 90 Proceedings of the 22nd conference on Winter simulation
Distributed Simulation: A Case Study in Design and Verification of Distributed Programs
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
A speculation-based approach for performance and dependability analysis: a case study
Proceedings of the 30th conference on Winter simulation
Performance Evaluation of a Clustered Adaptive-Risk Approach for Parallel Simulation
ISCC '97 Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC '97)
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
The performance of adaptive protocols using either aggressiveness control, risk control or both are compared to each other and an optimistic protocol. Empirical results are presented from execution on a CM-5 using up to 256 nodes. The results demonstrate that between the aggressiveness and risk control protocols, the aggressiveness control protocol performs better overall; however, risk control performs best in some situations. A protocol combining aggressiveness and risk control is more consistent at performing better than an optimistic protocol. Also, the use of straggler information is seen to enhance the risk control protocol.