English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

State-saving and reverse computation are two different approaches by which rollback is realized in Time Warp-based parallel simulation systems. Of the two approaches, state-saving is, in general, more memory-intensive than reverse computation. When executed on a state-of-the-art commercial CC-NUMA (Cache Coherent Non-Uniform Memory Architecture) multiprocessor, our Time Warp system runs almost 6 times slower if state-saving is used than if reverse computation is used. The focus of this paper is to understand why state-saving yields such poor performance when compared to reverse computation on a CC-NUMA multiprocessor. To address this question, we examined the low level machine performance statistics, especially those that relate to memory system performance, such as caching, and translation look-aside buffer (TLB) misses. The outcome of the performance study suggests that TLB misses are the primary culprit for state-saving's performance degradation.

The effect of state-saving in optimistic simulation on a cache-coherent non-uniform memory access architecture