Skip to main content
Log in

Abstract

Although there are several factors contributing to the difficulty in meeting distributed real time transaction deadlines, data conflicts among transactions, especially in commitment phase, are the prime factor resulting in system performance degradation. Therefore, design of an efficient commit protocol is of great significance for distributed real time database systems (DRTDBS). Most of the existing commit protocols try to improve system performance by allowing a committing cohort to lend its data to an executing cohort, thus reducing data inaccessibility. These protocols block the borrower when it tries to send WORKDONE/PREPARED message [1, 6, 8, 9], thus increasing the transactions commit time. This paper first analyzes all kind of dependencies that may arise due to data access conflicts among executing-committing transactions when a committing cohort is allowed to lend its data to an executing cohort. It then proposes a static two-phase locking and high priority based, write-update type, ideal for fast and timeliness commit protocol i.e. SWIFT. In SWIFT, the execution phase of a cohort is divided into two parts, locking phase and processing phase and then, in place of WORKDONE message, WORKSTARTED message is sent just before the start of processing phase of the cohort. Further, the borrower is allowed to send WORKSTARTED message, if it is only commit dependent on other cohorts instead of being blocked as opposed to [1, 6, 8, 9]. This reduces the time needed for commit processing and is free from cascaded aborts. To ensure non-violation of ACID properties, checking of completion of processing and the removal of dependency of cohort are required before sending the YES-VOTE message. Simulation results show that SWIFT improves the system performance in comparison to earlier protocol. The performance of SWIFT is also analyzed for partial read-only optimization, which minimizes intersite message traffic, execute-commit conflicts and log writes consequently resulting in a better response time. The impact of permitting the cohorts of the same transaction to communicate with each other [5] on SWIFT has also been analyzed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. B. Qin and Y. Liu, “High performance distributed real time commit protocol,” Journal of Systems and Software, Elsevier Science Inc., pp. 1–8, 2003.

  2. C. Mohan, B. Lindsay, and R. Obermarck, “Transaction management in the R* distributed database Management System,” ACM Transaction on Database Systems, vol. 11, no. 4, 1986.

  3. N. Soparkar, E. Levy, H.F. Korth, and A. Silberschatz, “Adaptive commitment for real-time distributed transaction,” Technical Report TR-92-15, Department of Computer Science, University of Texax, Austin, 1992.

  4. Y. Yoon, J. Cho, and C. Han, “ Real-time commit protocol for distributed real-time database systems,” in Proceedings of Second International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems, Canada, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 1996, pp. 221–225.

  5. K.Y. Lam, C. L. Pang, S.H. Son, and J. Cao, “Resolving executing-committing conflicts in distributed real-time database systems,” The Computers Journal, vol. 42, no. 8, pp. 674–692, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. J. Haritsa, K. Ramamritham, and R. Gupta, “The PROMPT real time commit protocol,” IEEE Transaction on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 160–181, 2000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. K.Y. Lam, “Concurrency control in distributed real time database systems,” PhD Thesis, City University of Hong Kong, 1994.

  8. R. Gupta, J. Haritsa, K. Ramamritham, and S. Seshadri, “Commit processing in distributed real time database systems,” in Proceedings of Real-time Systems Symposium, Washington DC. IEEE Computer Society Press, San Francisco, 1996.

  9. R. Gupta, J. Haritsa, and K. Ramamritham, “More optimistic about real time distributed commit processing,” in Proceedings of Real-Time Systems Symposium, 1997.

  10. K. Ramamritham and P.P. Chrysanthis, “A taxonomy of correctness criteria in database applications,” VLDB Journal, vol. 5, pp. 85–97, 1996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. O. Ulusoy, “A study of two transaction processing architecture for distributed real-time database systems,” Journal of System Software, vol. 31, pp. 97–108, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. O. Ulusoy, and A. Buchmann, “A real time concurrency control protocol for main memory database systems,” Information System, vol. 23, pp. 109–125, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. O. Ulusoy, “Concurrency control in real time database systems,” PhD Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, 1992.

  14. J. Gray and A. Reuter, Transaction Processing: Concepts and Technique, Morgan Kaufman, San Mateo, CA, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  15. C.L. Pang and K.Y. Lam, “On using similarity for resolving conflicts at commit in mixed distributed real-time databases,” in Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Real-Time Computing Systems and Applications, Oct. 1998, pp. 27–29.

  16. J.N. Gray, “Notes on database operating systems,” Operating Systems: An Advanced Course, vol. 60, pp. 397–405, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  17. K.Y. Lam, S.L. Hung, and S.H. Son, “On Using Real-Time Static Locking Protocols for Distributed Real-Time Databases,” Real-Time Systems, vol. 13, pp. 141–166, 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. R. Rajkumar, “Task Synchronization in real time systems,” Ph.D. Thesis, Carnegie-Mellon University, 1989.

  19. L. Sha, R. Rajkumar, and J.P. Lehoczky, “Concurrency Control for distributed real time data bases,” ACM SIGMOD Record, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 82–98, 1988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. A. Thomasian, “Two phase locking performance and Its thrashing behavior,” ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 579–625, 1993

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. A. Silberschatz, H.F. Korth, and S. Sudarshan, Database Management, McGraw Hill Higher Education, International Edition 2002.

  22. V.C.S. Lee, K.Y. Lam, and B. Kao, “Priority scheduling of transactions in distributed real-time databases,” The International Journal of Time-Critical Computing Systems, vol. 16, pp. 31–62, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. J. Taina and S. Son, “Towards a General Real-Time Database Simulator Software Library,” in Proceedings of Active and Real-Time Database Systems, 1999.

  24. D. Agrawal, A. El Abbadi, R. Jeffers, and L. Lin, “Ordered share locks for real time databases,” Journal of VLDB, vol. 4, pp. 87–126, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. K. Ramamritham, “Real-time databases,” Distributed and Parallel Databases, Special issue: Research topics in distributed and parallel databases, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 199–226, April 1993.

  26. J.R. Haritsa, M.J. Carey, and M. Livny, “Data access scheduling in firm real-time database systems,” Journal of Real-Time Systems, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 203–242, 1992. http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/haritsa92data.html

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Udai Shanker.

Additional information

Recommended by: Ahmed Elmagarmid

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shanker, U., Misra, M. & Sarje, A.K. SWIFT—A new real time commit protocol. Distrib Parallel Databases 20, 29–56 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10619-006-8594-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10619-006-8594-8

Keywords

Navigation