Context-specific synchronization for atomic data types

  • M. H. Wong
  • D. Agrawal
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 646)


Highly concurrent and reliable atomic data types are crucial for the design of distributed systems. Deferred update (DU) and update-in-place (UIP) are two common recovery strategies for implementing atomic data types. These two strategies place incomparable constraints on the conflict relations between concurrent operations resulting in incomparable synchronization protocols. Also, the conflict relations used are usually static in the sense that the algorithms do not use the context-specific information that may be available in the system. In this paper, a new synchronization mechanism that employs a hybrid recovery scheme by using both DU and UIP is proposed. Furthermore, the protocol is dynamic in the sense that the context-specific information is also used to determine conflict relations among concurrent operations on the atomic data types.Another extension is the use of ordered shared relationship between locks to execute conflicting operations concurrently. Thus, the execution of operations is never delayed in the proposed protocol, however, the commitment of the transactions invoking these operations may be delayed due to the restriction imposed by the ordered shared relationship between locks. We also demonstrate that the sets of histories accepted by a two phase locking protocol using either DU or UIP are proper subsets of the set of histories accepted by the proposed protocol.


Database System Bank Account Concurrency Control Operation Sequence Shared Relation 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    D. Agrawal and A. El Abbadi. Locks with Constrained Sharing. In Proceedings of the Ninth ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pages 85–93, April 1990. An expanded version of this paper appears as technical report TRCS 90-14, Department of Computer Science, University of California, Santa Barbara.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. A. Bernstein, V. Hadzilacos, and N. Goodman. Concurrency Control and Recovery in Database Systems. Addison Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1987.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. A. Bernstein, D. W. Shipman, and W. S. Wong. Formal aspects of serializability in database concurrency control. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 5(5):203–216, May 1979.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Bondavalli, N.De. Francesco, D. Latella, and G. Vaglini. Shared Abstract Data Types: An Algebraic Methodology for their Specification. 2nd Symposium on Mathematical Fundamentals of Database Systems, pages 53–67, 1989.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    B.R.Badrinath and K. Ramamritham. Semantics-Based Concurrency Control: Beyond Commutativity. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 17(1):163–199, 1992.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Herlihy. A Quorum-Consensus Replication Method for Abstract Data Types. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 4(1):32–53, February 1986.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    H. F. Korth. Locking primitives in a database system. Journal of the ACM, 30(1):55–79, January 1983.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. P. Ng. Using Histories to implement. Atomic Objects. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 7(4):360–393, November 1989.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. H. Papadimitriou. The Serializability of Concurrent Database Updates. Journal of the ACM, 26(4):631–653, October 1979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. M. Schwarz and A. Z. Spector. Synchronizing shared abstract types. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 2(3):223–250, August 1984.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    W. E. Weihl. Data-Dependent Concurrency Control and Recovery. In Proceedings of the Second ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pages 63–75, August 1983.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    W. E. Weihl. Specification and Implementation of Atomic Data Types. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1984.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    W. E. Weihl. Local Atomicity Properties: Modular Concurrency Control for Abstract Data Types. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 11(2):249–283, April 1989.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    W. E. Weihl. The Impact of Recovery on Concurrency Control. In Proceedings of the Eighth ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pages 259–269, March 1989.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    M. H. Wong and D. Agrawal. Context-Specific Synchronization for Atomic Data. Technical Report TRCS 92-7, Department of Computer Science, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA93106, 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. H. Wong
    • 1
  • D. Agrawal
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CaliforniaSanta Barbara

Personalised recommendations