Atomic Commitment in Transactional DHTs

  • Monika Moser
  • Seif Haridi

We investigate the problem of atomic commit in transactional database systems built on top of Distributed Hash Tables. Therefore we present a framework for DHTs to provide strong data consistency and transactions on data stored in a decentralized way. To solve the atomic commit problem within distributed transactions, we propose to use an adaption of Paxos commit as a non-blocking algorithm. We exploit the symmetric replication technique existing in the DKS DHT to determine which nodes are necessary to execute the commit algorithm. By doing so, we achieve a lower number of communication rounds in contrast to applying traditional Three-Phase-Commit protocols. We also show how the proposed solution can cope with dynamism due to churn in DHTs. Our solution works correctly relying only on an inaccurate failure detection of node failure, what is necessary for systems running over the Internet.


Database System Node Failure Distribute Hash Table Transaction Manager Communication Round 
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]
    I. Stoica, R. Morris, D. Karger, F. Kaashoek and H. Balakrishnan. Chord: A Scalable Peer-To-Peer Lookup Service for Internet Applications. Proceedings of the 2001 ACM SIGCOMM Conference, 2001, 149-160Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Thorsten Sch ütt, Florian Schintke and Alexander Reinefeld. Structured Overlay without Consistent Hashing: Empirical Results. Proceedings of the Sixth Workshop on Global and Peer-to-Peer Computing (GP2PC’06), 2006Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    A. Ghodsi. Distributed k-ary System: Algorithms for Distributed Hash Tables KTH. Doctoral Dissertation, KTH — Royal Institute of Technology, 2006Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    L. Onana Alima, S. El-Ansary, P. Brand and S. Haridi. DKS (N, k, f): A Family of Low Communication, Scalable and Fault-Tolerant Infrastructures for P2P Applications. In Proceedings of the 3st International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid, 2003Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    A. Ghodsi, L. Alima and S. Haridi. Symmetric Replication for Structured Peer-to-Peer Systems. In The 3rd Int Workshop on Databases, Information Systems and Peer-to-Peer Computing, 2005Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    J. Gray and L. Lamport. Consensus on transaction commit. In ACM Trans. Database Syst., ACM Press, 2006, 31, 133-160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    R. Guerraoui and L. Rodrigues. Introduction to Reliable Distributed Programming. Springer-Verlag, 2006Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    L. Lamport. Paxos Made Simple. 2001Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    L. Lamport. The part-time parliament. In ACM Trans. Comput. Syst., ACM Press, 1998, 16,133-169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    S. Ratnasamy, P. Francis, M. Handley, R. Karp and S. Schenker. A scalable content- addressable network. In SIGCOMM ’01: Proceedings of the 2001 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications, ACM Press, 2001, 161-172Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    B. Temkow, A. Bosneag, X. Li and M. Brockmeyer. PaxonDHT: Achieving Consensus in Distributed Hash Tables. In SAINT ’06: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Applications on Internet, IEEE Computer Society, 2006, 236-244Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    S. Gilbert and N. Lynch. Brewer’s conjecture and the feasibility of consistent, available, partition-tolerant web services. In SIGACT News, 2002Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    J. Kubiatowicz , et al. OceanStore: An Architecture for Global-scale Persistent Storage. In Proceedings of ACM ASPLOS, 2000Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Monika Moser
    • 1
  • Seif Haridi
    • 2
  1. 1.Zuse Institute Berlin (ZIB)Germany
  2. 2.Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)Sweden

Personalised recommendations