Encyclopedia of Database Systems

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

Multilevel Transactions and Object-Model Transactions

  • Gerhard WeikumEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8265-9_728


Layered transactions; Open nested transactions


Multilevel transactions are a variant of nested transactions where nodes in a transaction tree correspond to executions of operations at particular levels of abstraction in a layered system architecture. The edges in a tree represent the implementation of an operation by a sequence (or partial ordering) or operations at the next lower level. An example instantiation of this model are transactions with record and index-key accesses as high-level operations which are in turn implemented by reads and writes of database pages as low-level operations. The model allows reasoning about the correctness of concurrent executions at different levels, aiming for serializability at the top level: equivalence to a sequential execution of the transaction roots. This way, semantic properties of operations, like different forms of commutativity, can be exploited for higher concurrency, and correctness proofs for the corresponding...

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

Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Beeri C, Bernstein PA, Goodman N. A model for concurrency in nested transactions systems. J ACM. 1989;36(2):230–69.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Davies CT, Davies Jr CT. Data processing spheres of control. IBM Syst J. 1978;17(2):179–98.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gray J, Reuter A. Transaction processing: concepts and techniques. Los Altos: Morgan Kaufmann; 1993.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Greenfield P, Fekete A, Jang J, Kuo D, Nepal S. Isolation support for service-based applications: a position paper. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Biennial Conference on Innovative Data Systems Research; 2007. p. 314–23.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lomet DB. MLR: a recovery method for multi-level systems. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data; 1992. p. 185–94.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mohan C, Haderle DJ, Lindsay BG, Pirahesh H, Schwarz PM. ARIES: a transaction recovery method supporting fine-granularity locking and partial rollbacks using write-ahead logging. ACM Trans Database Syst. 1992;17(1):94–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Moss JEB, Griffeth ND, Graham MH. Abstraction in recovery management. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data; 1986. p. 72–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ni Y, Menon V. Adl-Tabatabai A-R, Hosking AL, Hudson RL, Moss JEB, Saha B, Shpeisman T. Open nesting in software transactional memory. In: Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming; 2007. p. 68–78.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ramamritham K, Chrysanthis PK. A taxonomy of correctness criteria in database applications. VLDB J. 1996;5(1):85–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schuldt H, Alonso G, Beeri C, Schek H-J. Atomicity and isolation for transactional processes. ACM Trans Database Syst. 2002;27(1):63–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Weikum G. Principles and realization strategies of multilevel transaction management. ACM Trans Database Syst. 1991;16(1):132–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Weikum G, Hasse C. Multi-level transaction management for complex objects: implementation, performance, parallelism. VLDB J. 1993;2(4):407–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Weikum G, Schek H-J. Architectural issues of transaction management in multi-layered systems. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases; 1984. p. 454–65.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Weikum G, Vossen G. Transactional information systems: theory, algorithms, and the practice of concurrency control and recovery. Los Altos: Morgan Kaufmann; 2001.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zimmermann O, Grundler J, Tai S, Leymann F. Architectural decisions and patterns for transactional workflows in SOA. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing; 2007. p. 81–93.Google Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department 5: Databases and Information SystemsMax-Planck-Institut für InformatikSaarbrückenGermany

Section editors and affiliations

  • Panos K. Chrysanthis
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Computer ScienceUniv. of PittsburghPittsburghUSA