Commutativity-Based Locking for Nested Transactions

  • Alan Fekete
  • Nancy Lynch
  • Michael Merritt
  • William Weihl
Conference paper
Part of the Workshops in Computing book series (WORKSHOPS COMP.)

Abstract

We introduce a new algorithm for concurrency control in nested transaction systems. The algorithm uses semantic information about an object (commutativity of operations) to obtain more concurrency than is available with Moss’ locking algorithm which is currently used as the default in systems like Argus and Camelot. We define “dynamic atomicity”, a local property of an object, and prove that dynamic atomicity of each object guarantees the correctness of the whole system. Objects implemented using the commutativity-based locking algorithm are dynamic atomic.

Keywords

Prefix Alan Phan Mellon 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    J. Aspnes, A. Fekete, N. Lynch, M. Merritt, and W. Weihl. A theory of timestamp-based concurrency control for nested transactions. In Proceedings of 14th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pages 431–444, August 1988.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    A. Fekete, N. Lynch, M. Merritt, and W. Weihl. Nested transactions and read/write locking. In 6th ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pages 97–111, San Diego, CA, March 1987. Expanded version available as Technical Memo MIT/LCS/TM-324, Laboratory for Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute Technology, Cambridge, MA, April 1987.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    A. Fekete, N. Lynch, M. Merritt, and W. Weihl. Commutativity-based locking for nested transactions. Technical Memo MIT/LCS/TM-370, Massachusetts Institute Technology, Laboratory for Computer Science, August 1988. A revised version will appear in JCSS.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    K. Goldman and N. Lynch. Nested transactions and quorum consensus. In Proceedings of 6th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computation, pages 27–41, August 1987. Expanded version is available as Technical Report MIT/LCS/TM-390, Laboratory for Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute Technology, Cambridge, MA, May 1987.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    M. Herlihy, N. Lynch, M. Merritt, and W. Weihl. On the correctness of orphan elimination algorithms. In Proceedings of 17th IEEE Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing, pages 8–13, 1987. Also, MIT/LCS/TM-329, MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, Cambridge, MA, May 1987. To appear in Journal of the ACM.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    B. Liskov. Distributed computing in argus. Communications of ACM, 31(3):300–312, March 1988.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. A theory of atomic transactions. In International Conference on Database Theory, pages 41–71, Bruges, Belgium, September 1988. LNCS 326, Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    N. Lynch and M. Tuttle. Hierarchical correctness proofs for distributed algorithms. In Proceedings of 6th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computation, pages 137–151, August 1987. Expanded version available as Technical Report MIT/LCS/TR-387, Laboratory for Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute Technology, Cambridge, MA., April 1987.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    J.E.B. Moss. Nested Transactions: An Approach to Reliable Distributed Computing. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute Technology, 1981. Technical Report MIT/LCS/TR-260, Laboratory for Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute Technology, April 1981. Also, published by MIT Press, March 1985.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    A. Spector and K. Swedlow. Guide to the camelot distributed transaction facility: Release 1, October 1987. Available from Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    W.E. Weihl. Specification and Implementation of Atomic Data Types. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute Technology, 1984. Technical Report MIT/LCS/TR-314, Laboratory for Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute Technology, Cambridge, MA, March 1984.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© British Computer Society 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alan Fekete
    • 1
  • Nancy Lynch
    • 2
  • Michael Merritt
    • 3
  • William Weihl
    • 4
  1. 1.University of SydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyUSA
  3. 3.AT&T Bell LaboratoriesUSA
  4. 4.Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyUSA

Personalised recommendations