Ensuring Task Dependencies During Workflow Recovery

  • Indrakshi Ray
  • Tai Xin
  • Yajie Zhu
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3180)


Workflow management systems (WFMS) coordinate execution of multiple tasks performed by different entities within an organization. In order to coordinate the execution of the various tasks in a workflow, task dependencies are specified among them. These task dependencies are enforced during the normal execution of the workflow. When a system crash occurs some tasks of the workflow may be committed, some may be partially executed and others unscheduled. In such a situation, the recovery mechanism must take appropriate actions to react to the failure. Although researchers have worked on the problem of workflow recovery, most of these work focus on restoring consistency by removing the effects of partially executed tasks. However, these work fail to address how to ensure task dependencies during workflow recovery. In this paper, we consider the workflow recovery problem and propose a recovery scheme that ensures the satisfaction of dependencies in a workflow and restores consistency as well.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Atluri, V., Huang, W., Bertino, E.: An Execution Model for Multilevel Secure Workows. In: Database Securty XI: Status and Prospects, IFIP TC11 WG11.3 Eleventh International Conference on Database Security (August 1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Attie, P.C., Singh, M.P., Sheth, A.P., Rusinkiewicz, M.: Specifying and enforcing intertask dependencies. In: 19th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, Dublin, Ireland, August 24-27. Proceedings, pp. 134–145. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1993)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bernstein, P.A., Hadzilacos, V., Goodman, N.: Concurrency Control and Recovery in Database Systems. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1987)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chrysanthis, P.: ACTA, A framework for modeling and reasoning aout extended transactions. PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts (1991)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eder, J., Liebhart, W.: Workow Recovery. In: Proceeding of Conference on Cooperative Information Systems, pp. 124–134 (1996)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Garcia-Molina, H., Ullman, J.D., Widom, J.: Database Systems: The Complete Book. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Georgakopoulos, D., Hornick, M., Sheth, A.: An overview of workow management: From process modeling to workow automation infrastructure. Distributed and parallel Databases 3, 119–153 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hollingsworth, D.: Workow Reference Model. Technical report, Workow Management Coalition, Brussels, Belgium (1994)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kamath, M., Ramamritham, K.: Failure Handling and Coordinated Execution of ConcurrentWorkows. In: Proceeding of the Fourteenth International Conference on Data Engineering (February 1998)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kiepuszewski, B., Muhlberger, R., Orlowska, M.: Flowback: Providing backward recovery for workow systems. In: Proceeding of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pp. 555–557 (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Indrakshi Ray
    • 1
  • Tai Xin
    • 1
  • Yajie Zhu
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceColorado State University 

Personalised recommendations