Advertisement

Similarity Semantics and Concurrency Control

  • Tei-Wei Kuo
  • Aloysius K. Mok
Part of the The Springer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science book series (SECS, volume 396)

Abstract

A number of analytic and simulation studies on the performance of scheduling algorithms to meet transaction deadlines have been reported in the literature, e.g., [1, 3, 9, 22, 29, 30]. In these studies, database consistency is preserved by enforcing serializability. However, serializability is often too strict a correctness criterion for real-time applications, where the precision of an answer to a query may still be acceptable even if serializability is not strictly observed in transaction scheduling. Obviously, violation of serializability must be justified in the context of the semantics of the application domain. The subject of this chapter is to examine the time-volatility of real-time databases which sets them apart from conventional databases. New correctness criteria and concurrency control protocols will be introduced which take into account the time-volatility of data by means of the concept of similarity.

Keywords

Data Object Conjunctive Normal Form Concurrency Control Correctness Criterion Write Condition 
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.

References

  1. [1]
    R. Abbott and H. Garcia-Molina, “Scheduling Real-Time Transactions: A Performance Evaluation,” Proceeding of the 14th VLDB Conference, Los Angeles, CA 1988, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    T.P. Baker, “A Stack-Based Resource Allocation Policy for Real Time Processes”, IEEE 11th Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 4-7, 1990.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    A. Bestavros, “Timeliness Via Speculation for Real-Time Databases,” IEEE 15th Real-Time Systems Symposium, 1994.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    W. Du and A.K. Elmagarmid, “Quasi Serializability: a Correctness Criterion for Global Concurrency Control in InterBase,” Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Very Large Data Base, 1989.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    S.B. Davidson and A. Watters, “Partial Computation in Real-Time Database Systems,” IEEE 5th Workshop on Real-time Software and Operating Systems, May 1988.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Marc H. Graham, “How to Get Serializability for Real-Time Transactions without Having to Pay for It,” IEEE 14th Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 1993.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    H. Garcia-Molina and K. Salem, “SAGAS,” In Proceedings of 1987 ACM SIGMOD Conference on Management of Data, 1987.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    H. Garcia-Molina and G. Wiederhold, “Read-Only Transactions in a Distributed Database,” ACM Transactions on Database Systems, Vol. 7, No. 2, June 1982.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    J.R. Haritsa, M.J. Carey, and M. Livny, “On Being Optimistic about Real-Time Constraints,” Preceedings of the 9th ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, April 1990, pp. 331–343.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Y.-K. Kim and S.H. Son, “Supporting Predictability in Real-Time Database Systems,” IEEE 1996 Real-Time Technology and Applications Symposium, 1996.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    T.-W. Kuo and A.K. Mok, “Load Adjustment in Adaptive Real-Time Systems,” IEEE 12th Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 1991.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    T.-W. Kuo and A.K. Mok, “Application Semantics and Concurrency Control of Real-Time Data-Intensive Applications,” IEEE 13th Real-Time Systems Symposium, 1992.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    T.-W. Kuo and A.K. Mok, “SSP: a Semantics-Based Protocol for Real-Time Data Access,” IEEE 14th Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 1993.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    T.-W. Kuo and A.K. Mok, “Using Data Similarity to Achieve Synchronization for Free,” IEEE 11th Workshop on Real-Time Operating Systems and Software, May 1994.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    T.-W. Kuo, “Real-Time Database — Semantics and Resource Scheduling,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas at Austin, 1994.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    T.-W. Kuo and A.K. Mok, “The Design and Implementation of A Real-Time Object Management Interface,” 1995 IEEE Real-Time Technology and Applications Symposium, May 1995.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    H.F. Korth and G.D. Speegle, “Formal Model of Correctness Without Serializability,” In Proceedings of 1988 ACM SIGMOD Conference on Management of Data, 1988.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    H.F. Korth, N. Soparkar, and A. Silberschatz, “Triggered Real Time Databases with Consistency Constraints”, Proceedings of the 16th VLDB Conference, Brisbane, August 1990.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    C.L. Liu and J.W. Layland, “Scheduling Algorithms for Multiprogramming in a hard Real-Time Environment,” Journal of the ACM, Vol. 20, No. 1, January 1973.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    K.-J. Lin and M.-J. Lin, “Enchancing Availability in Distributed Real-Time Databases,” ACM SIGMOD Record, Vol. 17, No. 1, March 1988, pp. 34–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    K.-J. Lin, Swami Natarajan, and Jane W.-S. Liu, “Imprecise Results: Utilizing Partial Computations in Real-Time Systems,” IEEE 8th Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 1987.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Y. Lin and S.H. Son, “Concurrency Control in Real-Time Databases by Dynamic Adjustment of Serialization Order,” IEEE 11th Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 4-7, 1990.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    C. Papadimitriou, “The Theory of Database Concurrency Control,” Computer Science Press, 1986.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    C.-S. Peng and K.-J. Lin, “A Semantic-Based Concurrency Control Protocol for Real-Time Transactions,” IEEE 1996 Real-Time Technology and Applications Symposium, 1996.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    K. Ramamritham and C. Pu, “A Formal Characterization of Epsilon Serializability,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, Dec 1995, pp. 997–1007.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    C. Pu and A. Leff, “Epsilon-Serializability,” Technical Report CUCS-054-90, Dept. of Computer Science, Columbia University, January, 1991.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    X. Song and J. W.-S. Liu, “Maintaining Temporal Consistency: Pessimistic vs Optimistic Concurrency Control,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, October 1995, pp. 787–796.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    L. Sha, R. Rajkumar, and J.P. Lehoczky, “Priority Inheritance Protocols: An Approach to Real-Time Synchronization,” Technical Report CMU-CS-87-181, Dept. of Computer Science, CMU, November, 1987. IEEE Transactions on Computers, Vol. 39, No. 9, September 1990.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    L. Sha, R. Rajkumar, and J.P. Lehoczky, “Concurrency Control for Distributed Real-Time Databases,” ACM SIGMOD Record, Vol 17, No.1, March 1988, pp. 82–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    L. Shu and M. Young, “A Mixed Locking/Abort Protocol for Hard Real-Time Systems,” IEEE 11th Workshop on Real-Time Operating Systems and Software, May 1994, pp. 102–106.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tei-Wei Kuo
    • 1
  • Aloysius K. Mok
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Information EngineeringNational Chung Cheng UniversityChiayiTaiwan, ROC
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Texas at AustinAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations