Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Revisiting Transaction Management in Multidatabase Systems

  • Published:
Distributed and Parallel Databases Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A lot of research efforts have focused on global serializability, global atomicity, and global deadlocks in multidatabase systems. Surprisingly, however, very few transaction processing model exists that ensures global serializability, global atomicity, and freedom from global deadlocks in a uniform manner. In this paper, we examine previous transaction processing models and propose a new transaction processing model that generates globally serializable and deadlock-free schedules in failure-prone multidatabase systems. A new transaction processing model adopts rigid conflict serializability as a correctness criterion on global serializability, and follows an emulated 2PC, criteria for global commitment, and an abort-based multidatabase recovery scheme for global serializability in failure-prone multidatabase systems. In addition, a deadlock-free policy is suggested where rigid conflict serializability is enforced when each subtransaction, including redo transactions, begins its execution. To practically support a new transaction processing model, Rigid Ticket Ordering (RTO) methods are designed. The proposed transaction processing model has the following improvements: (a) it resolves abnormal direct conflicts identified in this paper, (b) it imposes no restrictions on the execution of local transactions, and (c) it relaxes the restrictions on the execution of global transactions.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. D. Agrawal and A. Abbadi, “Locks with constrained sharing,” in Proceedings of the 9th ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, 1990, pp. 85–93.

  2. G. Alonso, R. Vingralek, D. Agrawal, Y. Breitbart, A. Abbadi, H. Schek, and G. Weikum, “A unified approach to concurrency control and transaction recovery,” Information Systems, vol. 19, no. 1, 1994, pp. 101–115.

    Google Scholar 

  3. P. Anastassopoulos and J. Dollimore, “A unified approach to distributed concurrency control,” in Distributed Computing Systems, L. Thomas, Casavant, and M. Singhal (Eds.), IEEE Computer Society Press, California, 1994, pp. 545–571.

    Google Scholar 

  4. B. Badrinath and K. Ramamritham, “Semantics-based concurrency control: Beyond commutativity,” ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 17, no. 1, 1992, pp. 163–199.

    Google Scholar 

  5. R. Batra, M. Rusinkiewicz, and D. Georgakopoulos, “A decentralized deadlock-free concurrency control method for multidatabase transactions,” in Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, 1992.

  6. P.A. Bernstein, V. Hadzilacos, and N. Goodman, Concurrency Control and Recovery in Database Systems Reading, Addison-Wesley: MA, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Y. Breitbart, H. Garcia-Molina, and A. Silberschatz, “Overview of multidatabase transaction managemnent,” VLDB Journal, vol. 1, no. 2, 1992, pp. 181–239.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Y. Breitbart, D. Georgakopoulos, M. Rusinkiewicz, and A. Silberschatz, “On rigorous transaction scheduling,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 17, no. 9, 1991, pp. 954–960.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Y. Breitbart, A. Silberschatz, and G. Thompson, “Reliable transaction management in a multidatabase system,” in Proc. of ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, 1990, pp. 215–224.

  10. W. Du and A. Elmagarmid, “Quasi serializability: A correctness criterion for global concurrency control in interbase,” in Proc. of the 15th International Conference on Very Large Databases, 1989, pp. 347–355.

  11. W. Du, A. Elmagarmid, and W. Kim, “Maintaining quasi serializability in multidatabase systems,” in Proc. of the 7th International Conference on Data Engineering, 1991, pp. 360–367.

  12. A. Elmagarmid and W. Du, “A paradigm for concurrency control in heterogeneous distributed database systems,” in Proc. of the 6th International Conference on Data Engineering, 1990, pp. 37–46.

  13. A. Elmagarmid, J. Jing, W. Kim, O. Bukhres, and A. Zhang, “Global commitability in multidatabase systems,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 8, no. 5, 1996, pp. 816–824.

    Google Scholar 

  14. D. Georgakopoulos, “Multidatabase recoverability and recovery,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Interoperability Multidatabase Systems, 1991, pp. 342–355.

  15. D. Georgakopoulos, M. Rusinkiewicz, and A. Sheth, “On serializability of multidatabase transactions through forced local conflicts,” in Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Data Engineering, 1991, pp. 314–323.

  16. D. Georgakopoulos, M. Rusinkiewicz, and A. Sheth, “Using tickets to enforce the serializability of multidatabase transactions,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 6, no. 1, 1994, pp. 166–180.

    Google Scholar 

  17. J. Gray, R. Lorie, A. Putzulo, and J. Traiger, “The recovery manager of the system R database manager,” ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 13, no. 2, 1981, pp. 223–242.

    Google Scholar 

  18. M. Guerni, J. Ferrie, J. Pons, T.W. Ling, A.O. Mendelzon, and L. Vieille, “Concurrency and recovery for typed objects using a new commutativity relation,” in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1013: Deductive and Object-Oriented Databases, T.W. Ling et al. (Ed.), 1995, pp. 411–428.

  19. M. Herlihy, “Apologizing versus asking permission: Optimistic concurrency control for abstract data types.” ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 15, no. 1, 1990, pp. 96–124.

    Google Scholar 

  20. I. Kang and T. Keefe, “Supporting reliable and atomic transaction management in multidatabase systems,” in Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, 1993, pp. 457–464.

  21. H. Korth, E. Levy, and A. Silberschatz, “A formal approach to recovery by compensating transactions,” in Proc. of the 16th International Conference on Very Large Databases, 1990, pp. 95–106.

  22. H. Kung and J. Robinson. “On optimistic methods for concurrency control,” ACM Transactions on Database Systems, vol. 6, no. 2, 1981, pp. 213–226.

    Google Scholar 

  23. S. Lee, C. Hwang, and W. Lee, “A uniform approach to global concurrency control and recovery in multidatabase environment,” in Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, 1997, pp. 51–58.

  24. S. Lee, S. Jung, and C. Hwang, “A new conflict relation for concurrency control and recovery in object-based databases,” in Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, 1996, pp. 288–295.

  25. E. Levy, H. Korth, and A. Silberschatz. “An optimistic commit protocol for distributed transaction management,” in Proceedings on the ACM SIGMOD Conference on Management of Data, 1991, pp. 88–97.

  26. W. Litwin, “From database systems to multidatabase systems: Why and how,” British National Conference on Databases, Cambridge Press, London, 1988.

  27. S. Mehrotra, R. Rastogi, Y. Breitbart, H. Korth, and A. Silberschatz, “Ensuring transaction atomicity in multidatabase systems,” in Proceedings of the 11th ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, 1992, pp. 164–175.

  28. S. Mehrotra, R. Rastogi, Y. Breitbart, H. Korth, and A. Silberschatz, “The concurrency control problem in multidatabases: Characteristics and solutions,” in Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD Conference on Management of Data, 1992, pp. 288–297.

  29. S. Mehrotra, R. Rastogi, H. Korth, and A. Silberschatz, “Non-serializable executions in heterogeneous distributed database systems,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Information Systems, 1991, pp. 245–252.

  30. T. Ng. “Using histories to implement atomic objects,” ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, vol. 7, no. 4, 1989, pp. 360–393.

    Google Scholar 

  31. R. Rastogi, H. Korth, and A. Silberschatz, “Exploiting transaction semantics in multidatabase systems,” in Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, 1995, pp. 101–109.

  32. Y. Raz, “The principle of commitment ordering, or guaranteeing serializability in a heterogeneous environment of multiple autonomous resource-managers,” in Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Very Large Databases, 1992, pp. 292–312.

  33. J. Veijalainen, Transaction concepts in autonomous databases environments, R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 1990.

  34. J. Veijalainen and A. Wolski, “Prepared and commit certification for decentralized transaction management in rigorous heterogeneous multidatabases,” in Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Data Engineering, 1992, pp. 470–479.

  35. R. Vingralek, H. Ye, Y. Breitbart, and H. Schek, “Unified transaction model for semantically rich operations,” in Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Database Theory, 1995, pp. 148–161.

  36. W. Weihl, “Commutativity-based concurrency control for abstract data types,” IEEE Transactions on Computer Systems, vol. 37, no. 12, 1988, pp. 1488–1505.

    Google Scholar 

  37. A. Wolski and J. Veijalainen, “2PC agent method: Achieving serializability in presence of failures in a heterogeneous multidatabase,” in Proceedings of the PARBASE-90 Conference, 1990, pp. 321–330.

  38. A. Zhang and A. Elmagarmid, “A theory of global concurrency control in multidatabase systems,” VLDB Journal, vol. 2, no. 3, 1993, pp. 331–360.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Korea University, 1, 5-ka, Anam-dong, Seongbuk-ku, Seoul, 136-701, South Korea

    Sangkeun Lee

  2. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Korea University, 1, 5-ka, Anam-dong, Seongbuk-ku, Seoul, 136-701, South Korea

    Chong-Sun Hwang

  3. Department of Computer Science Education, Korea University, 1, 5-ka, Anam-dong, Seongbuk-ku, Seoul, 136-701, South Korea

    Heonchang Yu

Authors
  1. Sangkeun Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chong-Sun Hwang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Heonchang Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lee, S., Hwang, CS. & Yu, H. Revisiting Transaction Management in Multidatabase Systems. Distributed and Parallel Databases 9, 39–65 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026557023984

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026557023984

Search

Navigation