1 / 21

transactions and concurrency control

transactions and concurrency control. Sadhna Kumari. OUTLINE. ACID Properties 2-Phase Commit Protocol TPS Serializability Concurrency Control Protocols Current Research Future References. ACID PROPERTIES. Atomicity: A transaction is either performed entirely or not at all.

romney
Télécharger la présentation

transactions and concurrency control

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. transactions and concurrency control Sadhna Kumari

  2. OUTLINE • ACID Properties • 2-Phase Commit Protocol • TPS • Serializability • Concurrency Control Protocols • Current Research • Future • References

  3. ACID PROPERTIES • Atomicity: A transaction is either performed entirely or not at all. • Consistency: After execution of a transaction, the database must be in correct state. • Isolation: Partial results of an incomplete transaction are not visible to others. • Durability: The results of a committed transaction must be made permanent.

  4. 2-PHASE COMMIT PROTOCOL Coordinator - pre-commit the transaction - sends request to all participants - collects all replies - if all replies are YES then commit and send COMMIT else abort and send ABORT - receives response Participant - receives pre-commit message - if ready then pre-commits and replies YES else aborts transaction and replies NO - receives decision - if commit then COMMIT, if abort then ABORT - send response

  5. distributed transaction processing system

  6. distributed transaction processing system (contd)

  7. serializability • Serial Schedule: serial execution of actions of set of transactions • Serializable schedule: Execution result is equivalent to that of serial schedule • Conflicts: write-write, read-write or write-read • Serializability ensures consistency

  8. serializability (example) • Serial schedule : {t1,t2}, {t2,t1} t0 COMMITED • Possible results {C,D} : {80,120}, {120,80} • Operation pairs {1,3} & {2,4} – write-write conflict

  9. interleaving schedules

  10. two phase locking • Expanding phase: new locks on items can be acquired but none can be released • Shrinking phase: existing locks can be released but no new ones can be acquired • Problems: • Deadlock • Rolling aborts • Commit dependence • Strict two phase locking: only release locks either at commit or at abort

  11. timestamp ordering • Each transaction has a Timestamp(TS) associated with it. • TS is not necessarily real time, can be a logical counter • TS is unique for a transaction • New transaction has larger TS than older transaction • Larger TS transactions wait for smaller TS transactions and smaller TS transactions die and restart when confronting larger TS transactions • No deadlock

  12. optimistic concurrency control • Allows entire transaction to complete and then validate the transaction before making its effect permanent • Execution Phase: Starts with begin transaction and ends with end transaction • Validation Phase: Coordinator TM with participant TMs validate the consistency using two-phase validation protocol • Update Phase: Update must be committed for validated transaction

  13. COMPARISON • 2PL is the most popular choice because it is simple • 2PL is a pessimistic protocol because it achieves serializability by restricting the operation in a transaction • Timestamp ordering is less pessimistic, allows operations to execute freely • Optimistic concurrency control ignores conflicts during execution, but requires very elaborate validation

  14. Current research

  15. distributed lock manager[3]

  16. distributed lock manager (GFS) • Locking responsibility is distributed • Partitioning the lock space (can be done by using hash function ) • Faster processing than centralized approach • Avoid single point failure • Deadlock detection is complicated

  17. concurrency control in real-time [4] • Each transaction is associated with a priority, high priority transaction has earlier deadline • Higher priority transaction obtains the lock first. Lower priority transaction has to sacrifice the lock. • If transaction confronts the same priority transaction, then lock is obtained by timestamp ordering

  18. Future

  19. Currently concurrency control mechanism are mostly at OS/Kernel level. With increasing parallel computing, user level locking mechanism should be made available • Small locking object is ideal for concurrency control. It is always better to lock attribute than whole file • Need for a standardized concurrency control protocol for distributed/parallel environment

  20. references [1] Distributed Operating Systems & Algorithms, Andy Chow & Theodore Johnson,1997 [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concurrency_control [3] Sungchune Choi ; Minseuk Choi ; Chunkyeong Lee ; Hee Yong Youn ; “Distributed Lock Manager for Distributed File System in Shared-Disk Environment” Sep 2010 [4] QianshengZheng ; Xiaoming Bi ; “An improved concurrency control algorithm for distributed real-time database” Aug 2010 [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_file_system

  21. THANK YOU

More Related