82.5k views
0 votes
A deadlock free solution to the dining philosophers problem :

a) necessarily eliminates the possibility of starvation
b) does not necessarily eliminate the possibility of starvation
c) eliminates any possibility of any kind of problem further
d) None of these

1 Answer

4 votes

Final answer:

A deadlock-free solution to the dining philosophers problem does not necessarily eliminate the possibility of starvation.

Step-by-step explanation:

A deadlock-free solution to the dining philosophers problem does not necessarily eliminate the possibility of starvation.

In the dining philosophers problem, a group of philosophers sit around a table with a bowl of rice in front of each of them. There are chopsticks between each philosopher to represent a shared resource that they need to eat. The challenge is to avoid deadlocks where each philosopher holds one chopstick and waits for the other one.

A deadlock-free solution ensures that no deadlock occurs, but it doesn't guarantee that starvation cannot happen. For example, in a solution where the philosophers take turns to pick up the chopsticks, one philosopher might have to wait for a long time before getting a chance to eat, leading to starvation.

User Dylan Holmes
by
8.9k points
Welcome to QAmmunity.org, where you can ask questions and receive answers from other members of our community.

9.4m questions

12.2m answers

Categories