Encyclopedia of Database Systems

2018 Edition
| Editors: Ling Liu, M. Tamer Özsu

Correctness Criteria Beyond Serializability

  • Mourad OuzzaniEmail author
  • Brahim Medjahed
  • Ahmed K. Elmagarmid
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8265-9_722


Concurrency control; Preserving database consistency


A transaction is a logical unit of work that includes one or more database access operations such as insertion, deletion, modification, and retrieval [7]. A schedule (or history) S of n transactions T1,…,Tn is an ordering of the transactions that satisfies the following two conditions: (i) the operations of Ti (i = 1,…,n) in S must occur in the same order in which they appear in Ti, and (ii) the operations of Tj (j ≠ i) may be interleaved with Ti’s operations in S. A schedule S is serial if for every two transactions Ti and Tj that appear in S, either all the operations of Ti appear before all the operations of Tj or vice versa. Otherwise, the schedule is called nonserial or concurrent. Nonserial schedules of transactions may lead to issues with the correctness of the schedule due to concurrency such as lost update, dirty read, and unrepeatable read. For instance, the lost update problem occurs whenever two...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Bernstein PA, Goodman N. Multiversion concurrency control – theory and algorithms. ACM Trans Database Syst. 1983;8(4):465–83.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bernstein PA, Hadzilacos V, Goodman N. Concurrency control and recovery in database systems. Reading: Addison-Wesley; 1987.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dayal U, Hsu M, Ladin R. Business process coordination: state of the art, trends, and open issues. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases; 2001. p. 3–13.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Du W, Elmagarmid AK. Quasi serializability: a correctness criterion for global concurrency control in Interbase. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases; 1989. p. 347–55.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eswaran KP, Gray J, Lorie RA, Traiger IL. The notions of consistency and predicate locks in a database system. Commun ACM. 1976;19(11):624–33.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Garcia-Molina H. Using semantic knowledge for transaction processing in a distributed database. ACM Trans Database Syst. 1983;8(2):186–213.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gray J, Reuter A. Transaction processing: concepts and techniques. Los Altos: Morgan Kaufmann; 1993.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gray J, Lorie RA, Putzolu GR, Traiger IL. Granularity of locks in a large shared data base. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Very Data Bases; 1975. p. 428–51.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Korth HF, Speegle GD. Formal model of correctness without serializability. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data; 1988. p. 379–86.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mehrotra S, Rastogi R, Korth HF, Silberschatz A. Ensuring consistency in multidatabases by preserving two-level serializability. ACM Trans Database Syst. 1998;23(2):199–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Papadimitriou CH. The serializability of concurrent database updates. J ACM. 1979;26(4):631–53.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Papadimitriou CH. The theory of database concurrency control. Rockville: Computer Science; 1986.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ramamritham K, Pu C. A formal characterization of epsilon serializability. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng. 1995;7(6):997–1007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sheth A, Leu Y, Elmagarmid A. Maintaining consistency of interdependent data in multidatabase systems. Technical Report CSD-TR-91-016, Purdue University. 1991. http://www.cs.toronto.edu/georgem/ws/ws.ps
  15. 15.
    Yannakakis M. Serializability by locking. J ACM. 1984;31(2):227–44.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mourad Ouzzani
    • 1
    Email author
  • Brahim Medjahed
    • 2
  • Ahmed K. Elmagarmid
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Qatar Computing Research InstituteHBKUDohaQatar
  2. 2.The University of Michigan – DearbornDearbornUSA
  3. 3.Purdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA