Measured Performance of Time Interval Concurrency Control Techniques.

@inproceedings{DBLP:conf/vldb/NoeW87,
  author    = {Jerre D. Noe and
               David B. Wagner},
  editor    = {Peter M. Stocker and
               William Kent and
               Peter Hammersley},
  title     = {Measured Performance of Time Interval Concurrency Control Techniques},
  booktitle = {VLDB'87, Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Very
               Large Data Bases, September 1-4, 1987, Brighton, England},
  publisher = {Morgan Kaufmann},
  year      = {1987},
  isbn      = {0-934613-46-X},
  pages     = {359-367},
  ee        = {db/conf/vldb/NoeW87.html},
  crossref  = {DBLP:conf/vldb/87},
  bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}
}

Abstract

This paper reports on an implementation of Bayer's Time Interval concurrency control method and compares it to the performance of a conventional timestamp method. The implementation was done on the Eden experimental local area network. Insofar as the authors are aware, this is the first actual implementation of the time interval technique.

The time interval approach clearly is better than time stamping. It provides higher throughput, causes one-third as many distributed transaction aborts, and requires very little additional overhead compared to time stamps.

Within the time interval method we further explored and compared the early and late serialization schemes described by Bayer and his colleagues. Early and late serialialization with time intervals show comparable performance over a range of read/write ratios and multiprogramming levels. In systems that write to disk at the end of all alterations, rather than writing incrementally, late serialization performs better than early serialization because checkpointing to disk can run in parallel with the concurrency control phase.

Copyright © 1987 by the VLDB Endowment. Permission to copy without fee all or part of this material is granted provided that the copies are not made or distributed for direct commercial advantage, the VLDB copyright notice and the title of the publication and its date appear, and notice is given that copying is by the permission of the Very Large Data Base Endowment. To copy otherwise, or to republish, requires a fee and/or special permission from the Endowment.

Online Paper

• Download PDF file (www.vldb.org, Darmstadt, Germany)
• Download PDF file (www.acm.org, New York, USA)

ACM SIGMOD Anthology

• Windows: Click the letter of your CD drive
  A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
• Mac: Click here
• UNIX/LINUX: mount the CD and click on the path of your mount point:
  /Anthology/vldb7588 or /cdrom

• Windows: Click the letter of your CD drive
  A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
• Mac: Click here
• UNIX/LINUX: mount the DVD and click on the path of your mount point:
  /Anthology/aDVD1 or /dvd

Printed Edition

References

[1]

Rakesh Agrawal, Michael J. Carey: The Performance of Concurrency Control and Recovery Algorithms for Transaction-Oriented Database Systems. IEEE Database Eng. Bull. 8(2): 58-67(1985) BibTeX

[2]

Guy T. Almes, Andrew P. Black, Edward D. Lazowska, Jerre D. Noe: The Eden System: A Technical Review. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 11(1): 43-59(1985) BibTeX

[3]

Rudolf Bayer, Klaus Elhardt, Johannes Heigert, Angelika Reiser: Dynamic Timestamp Allocation for Transactions in Database Systems. DDB 1982: 9-20 BibTeX

[4]

Rudolf Bayer, Hans Heller, Angelika Reiser: Parallelism and Recovery in Database Systems. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 5(2): 139-156(1980) BibTeX

[5]

Philip A. Bernstein, Nathan Goodman: Multiversion Concurrency Control - Theory and Algorithms. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 8(4): 465-483(1983) BibTeX

[6]

Andrew P. Black: Supporting Distributed Applications: Experience with Eden. SOSP 1985: 181-193 BibTeX

[7]

Michael J. Carey, Waleed A. Muhanna: The Performance of Multiversion Concurrency Control Algorithms. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst. 4(4): 338-378(1986) BibTeX

[8]

Stefano Ceri, Susan S. Owicki: On the Use of Optimistic Methods for Concurrency Control in Distributed Databases. Berkeley Workshop 1982: 117-129 BibTeX

[9]

Ricardo Cordon, Hector Garcia-Molina: The Performance of a Concurrency Control Mechanism that Exploits Semantic Knowledge. ICDCS 1985: 350-358 BibTeX

[10]

Peter A. Franaszek, John T. Robinson: Limitations of Concurrency in Transaction Processing. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 10(1): 1-28(1985) BibTeX

[11]

...

[12]

Jim Gray: Notes on Data Base Operating Systems. Advanced Course: Operating Systems 1978: 393-481 BibTeX

[13]

...

[14]

H. T. Kung, John T. Robinson: On Optimistic Methods for Concurrency Control. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 6(2): 213-226(1981) BibTeX

[15]

...

[16]

...

[17]

M. Tamer Özsu: Performance Comparison of Distributed vs. Centralized Locking Algorithms in Distributed Database Systems. ICDCS 1985: 254-261 BibTeX

[18]

Calton Pu, Jerre D. Noe, Andrew Proudfoot: Regeneration of Replicated Objects: A Technique and Its Eden Implementation. ICDE 1986: 175-187 BibTeX

[19]

...

[20]

...

Referenced by

1. Michael J. Carey, Miron Livny: Conflict Detection Tradeoffs for Replicated Data. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 16(4): 703-746(1991)
2. Philip S. Yu, Hans-Ulrich Heiss, Daniel M. Dias: Modeling and Analysis of a Time-Stamp History Based Certification Protocol for Concurrency Control. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 3(4): 525-537(1991)
3. Michael J. Carey, Miron Livny: Parallelism and Concurrency Control Performance in Distributed Database Machines. SIGMOD Conference 1989: 122-133
4. Michael J. Carey, Miron Livny: Distributed Concurrency Control Performance: A Study of Algorithms, Distribution, and Replication. VLDB 1988: 13-25