Conflict degree sort after priority topological sort #56
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
piotro888
approved these changes
Feb 9, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Currently, transactions which do not have priority relations have arbitrary scheduling order. This PR changes it so that the transactions with less conflicts are scheduled first. This should lead to granting transactions more greedily, which has the potential to improve performance. In practice, in current Coreblocks, some IPC numbers are improved, and some get slightly smaller. But still, I think having more determinism in the transaction scheduler is a good thing, as this will reduce weird performance changes on seemingly unrelated refactors, for example.
A new dependency is added, but given that Transactron relies heavily on graphs,
networkxseems like a dependency that might be useful in the future (for example, for #13).