Let's compare the circular-wait scheme with deadlock avoidance schemes like the banker's algorithm with respect to runtime overheads and system throughput.
1. Runtime Overheads:
- Circular-Wait Scheme: In the circular-wait scheme, each process is allowed to wait for a resource that is held by another process in a circular chain. This can lead to a situation where processes keep waiting indefinitely, causing a deadlock. The runtime overhead in this scheme is relatively low because no additional checks or computations are required to prevent deadlocks. However, the risk of deadlocks occurring is high, which can result in a significant impact on the system's performance if deadlocks do occur.
- Banker's Algorithm (Deadlock Avoidance): The Banker's algorithm is a deadlock avoidance scheme that carefully analyzes resource requests by processes before granting them. It checks whether granting a resource request would lead to a safe state (i.e., no possibility of deadlock) before allocating the resource. The runtime overhead in the Banker's algorithm is higher than the circular-wait scheme because it involves additional computations and checks to determine the safety of granting resources. However, it effectively prevents deadlocks and ensures that the system remains in a safe state.
2. System Throughput:
- Circular-Wait Scheme: Since the circular-wait scheme does not proactively prevent deadlocks, there is a risk of frequent deadlocks occurring in the system. When a deadlock happens, the system may have to spend a considerable amount of time resolving it, such as terminating processes or rolling back transactions. This can result in a decrease in system throughput, as resources are tied up in resolving deadlocks rather than executing useful processes.
- Banker's Algorithm (Deadlock Avoidance): The Banker's algorithm is designed to avoid deadlocks altogether. By carefully analyzing resource requests and ensuring that resource allocation does not lead to unsafe states, it significantly reduces the risk of deadlocks. As a result, system throughput is generally higher compared to the circular-wait scheme. Resources are allocated more efficiently, and the system can continue executing processes without getting stuck in deadlocks.
In summary, the circular-wait scheme has lower runtime overhead because it does not involve complex checks for deadlock prevention, but it comes with a higher risk of frequent deadlocks, leading to reduced system throughput. On the other hand, the Banker's algorithm has higher runtime overhead due to its deadlock avoidance checks, but it ensures a safer and more efficient allocation of resources, resulting in better system throughput. For critical systems, the Banker's algorithm is preferred as it minimizes the chances of deadlocks occurring and maximizes the system's overall performance.
No comments:
Post a Comment