Advertisement

A concurrency control algorithm for memory-resident database systems

  • Tobin J. Lehman
  • Michael J. Carey
Data Sharing
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 367)

Abstract

Recent trends in memory sizes, combined with a demand for high-performance data management facilities, have led to the emergence of database support for managing memory-resident data as a topic of interest. In this paper we address the concurrency control problem for main memory database systems. Because such systems differ significantly from traditional database systems in terms of their cost characteristics, existing solutions to the problem are inappropriate; we present a new scheme based on two-phase locking that minimizes the overhead associated with concurrency control without overly limiting opportunities for concurrently executing transactions. We accomplish this by allowing the granularity of locking to vary dynamically in response to changes in the level of inter-transaction conflicts. Unlike hierarchical locking schemes, however, we avoid the expense of setting locks at multiple levels of a granularity hierarchy. We present a simple empirical analysis, based on instruction counts, to validate our claims.

Keywords

Database System Concurrency Control Deadlock Detection Instruction Count Lock Mode 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

7 References

  1. [Agrawal 85]
    R. Agrawal, M. Carey, and M. Livny, “Models for Studying Concurrency Control Performance: Alternatives and Implications,” Proc. ACM SIGMOD Conf., May 1985.Google Scholar
  2. [Agrawal 87]
    R. Agrawal, M. Carey, and L. McVoy, “The Performance of Alternative Strategies for Dealing with Deadlocks in Database Management Systems,” IEEE Trans. on Software Eng., December 1987Google Scholar
  3. [Anon 85]
    Anon et al. “A measure of Transaction Processing Power”, Datamation, Vol 31, No 7, April 1, 1985.Google Scholar
  4. [Bernstein 81]
    P. Bernstein and N. and Goodman, “Concurrency Control in Distributed Database Systems,” ACM Computing Surveys 13, 2, June 1981.Google Scholar
  5. [Blasgen 79]
    M. Blasgen, J. Gray, M. Mitoma, and T. Price, “The Convoy Phenomenon,” Operating Systems Review 13, 2 April 1979.Google Scholar
  6. [Carey 83]
    M. Carey, “An Abstract Model of Database Concurrency Control Algorithms,” Proc. ACM SIGMOD Conf., May 1983.Google Scholar
  7. [Carey 84]
    M. Carey and M. Stonebraker, “The Performance of Concurrency Control Algorithms for Database Management Systems,” Proc. 10th VLDB Conf., August 1984.Google Scholar
  8. [Eswaran 76]
    K. Eswaran, J. Gray, R. Lorie, and I. Traiger, “The Notions of Consistency and Predicate Locks in a Database System,” CACM 19, 11, November 1976.Google Scholar
  9. [Ghandehari 89]
    S. Ghandehari (implementor of the GAMMA database machine lock manager), Personal communication, February 1989.Google Scholar
  10. [Gray 78]
    J. Gray, “Notes on Database Operating Systems,” Operating Systems, An Advanced Course, vol. 60, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1978.Google Scholar
  11. [Gray 89]
    J. Gray, Personal communication, February 1989.Google Scholar
  12. [Horwitz 85]
    S. Horwitz and T. Teitelbaum, “Relations and Attributes: A Symbiotic Basis for Editing Environments,” Proc. ACM SIGPLAN Conf. on Lang. Issues in Prog. Env., June 1985.Google Scholar
  13. [Jordan 81]
    J. Jordan, J. Bannerjee, and R. Batman, “Precision Locks”, Proc. ACM SIGMOD Conf., May 1981.Google Scholar
  14. [Lampson 79]
    B. Lampson, “An Open Operating System for a Single-User Machine,” Proc. of 7th Symp. on Operating Systems Principles, Pacific Grove, Calif., December 1979.Google Scholar
  15. [Lehman 86a]
    T. Lehman and M. Carey, “Query Processing in Main Memory Database Management Systems,” Proc. ACM SIGMOD Conf., May 1986.Google Scholar
  16. [Lehman 86b]
    T. Lehman, “Design and Performance Evaluation of a Main Memory Relational Database System,” Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison, August 1986.Google Scholar
  17. [Lehman 86c]
    T. Lehman and M. Carey, “A Study of Index Structures for Main Memory Database Management Systems,” Proc. 12th Conf. Very Large Data Bases, August 1986.Google Scholar
  18. [Lehman 87]
    T. Lehman and M. Carey, “A Recovery Algorithm for a High-Performance Memory-Resident Database System,” Proc. ACM SIGMOD Conf., May 1987.Google Scholar
  19. [Lehman 89]
    T. Lehman and M. Carey, A Concurrency Control Algorithm for Memory-Resident Database System, IBM Technical Report, April 1989.Google Scholar
  20. [Li 88]
    K. Li and J.F. Naughton, “Multiprocessor Main Memory Transaction Processing,” Proc. Int. Symp. on Databases in Parallel and Distributed Systems, December 1988.Google Scholar
  21. [Lindsay 85]
    Bruce Lindsay, Personal Communication, November 1985.Google Scholar
  22. [Linton 84]
    M. Linton, “Implementing Relational Views of Programs”, Proc. ACM SIGSOFT-SIGPLAN Symp. on Practical Software Development Environments, April 1984.Google Scholar
  23. [Powell 83]
    M.L. Powell and M.A. Linton, “Database Support for Programming Environments,” Proc. ACM SIGMOD Database Week, 1983.Google Scholar
  24. [Ries 79]
    D. Ries and M Stonebraker, “Locking Granularity Revisited”, ACM TODS 4, 2, June 1979.Google Scholar
  25. [Salem 86]
    K. Salem and H. Garcia-Molina, Crash Recovery Mechanisms for Main Storage Database Systems, Tech. Rep. No. CS-TR-0340-86, CS Dept., Princeton Univ., April 1986.Google Scholar
  26. [Snodgrass 84]
    R. Snodgrass, “Monitoring in a Software Development Environment: A Relational Approach,” Proc. ACM SIGSOFT-SIGPLAN Symp. on Practical Soft. Dev. Env., April 1984.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tobin J. Lehman
    • 1
  • Michael J. Carey
    • 2
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentIBM Almaden Research CenterUSA
  2. 2.Computer Sciences DepartmentUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations