Extending Resilient Objects Efficiently

  • Kenneth P. Birman
  • Thomas A. Joseph
  • Thomas Räuchle
Conference paper
Part of the Informatik-Fachberichte book series (INFORMATIK, volume 84)

Abstract

Resilient objects are instances of distributed abstract data types that are tolerant to failures. Due to the distributed nature of resilient objects and the replication of data, potential for a high degree of concurrency exists within them. This paper introduces a new concurrency control algorithm, which achieves higher concurrency than conventional methods like two-phase locking. Objects are specified in a high level language, and the algorithm uses the specification to take advantage of the structure of resilient objects and to exploit semantic information about operations. This information is given in a high level specification language.

Keywords

Mellon Cuted dOled 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [Ber81]
    Bernstein, P., Goodman, N. Concurrency Control in Distributed Database Systems„ ACM Computing Surveys 13, 2 (June 1981), 185–222.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [Ber83]
    Bernstein, P. A. and Goodman N. The Failure and Recovery Problem for Replicated Databases, Proceedings of the Second Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, Montreal, 1983, pp. 114–122.Google Scholar
  3. [Bir84a]
    Birman, K., Joseph, T., Râuchle, T., El abbadi, A. Implementing Fault-Tolerant Distributed Objects, submitted for publication, also available as Technical Report TR 84–594, Cornell University, Ithaca, May 1984.Google Scholar
  4. [Bir84b]
    Birman, K. Replication and Availability in ISIS, Technical Report, Cornell University, to appear Google Scholar
  5. [Gra78]
    Gray, J. N. Notes on Data Base Operating Systems, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 60, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1978Google Scholar
  6. Ked83] Kedem, Z. M. and Silberschatz, A. Locking Protocols: From Exclusive to Shared Locks, JA CM Vol. 80, No 4 (October 88),787–804Google Scholar
  7. [Kun81]
    Kung, H., Robinson, J. An Optimistic Method for Concurrency Control, Transactions on Database Systems 6, 2 (June 1981), 213–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [Lis74]
    Liskov, B. H. and Ziller, S. N. Programming with Abstract Data Types, Proc. ACM SIG-PLAN Conference on Very High Level Languages, SIGPLAN Notices 9, 4 (April 1974), 50–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [Lis83]
    Liskov, B, Scheifler, R., Guardians and Actions: Linguistic Support for Robust, Distributed Programs, Transactions on Programming Languages 5, 3 (July 1983), pp. 381–404.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [Lyn82]
    Lynch, N. Concurrency Control for Resilient Nested Transactions M.I.T. EECS Department, August 1982.Google Scholar
  11. [Mos81b]
    Moss, J.E., Nested Transactions: An Approach to Reliable Distributed Computing, Ph.D. thesis, M.I.T. Dept. of EECS, available as M.I.T. Lab. for CS Tech. Report 260, April 1981.Google Scholar
  12. [Ne181]
    Nelson, B. Remote Procedure Call, Ph.D. thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, Computer Science Tech. Report CS-81–119, Pittsburgh, PA, 1981.Google Scholar
  13. [Sch83]
    Schlichting, R.D., Schneider, F.B. Fail-Stop Processors: An Approach to Designing Fault-Tolerant Computing Systems, TOCS, August 1983.Google Scholar
  14. [Ske81]
    Skeen, D., Nonblocking commit protocols, SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, Pittsburg, Penn., July 1981Google Scholar
  15. [Spe83]
    Spector, A., Schwartz, P. Transactions: A construct for reliable distributed computing. Operating Systems Review 17, 2 (April 1983), 18–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kenneth P. Birman
    • 1
  • Thomas A. Joseph
    • 1
  • Thomas Räuchle
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceCornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations