Integrating Snapshot Isolation into Transactional Federations

  • Ralf Schenkel
  • Gerhard Weikum
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1901)

Abstract

This Paper reconsiders the Problem of transactional federations, more specifically the concurrency control issue, with particular consideration of component Systems that provide only snapshot isolation, which is the default setting in Oracle and widely used in practice. The Paper derives criteria and practical protocols for guaranteeing global serializability at the federation level. The Paper generalizes the well-known ticket method and develops novel federation-level graph testing methods to incorporate sub-serializability component Systems like Oracle. These contributions are embedded in a practical project that built a CORBA-based federated database architecture suitable for modern Internet- or Intranet-based applications such as electronie commerce. This prototype System, which includes a federated transaction manager coined Trafic (Transactional Federation of Information Systems Based on CORBA), has been fully implemented with support for Oracle and O2 as component Systems and using Orbix as federation middleware. The Paper presents Performance measurements that demonstrate the viability of the developed concurrency control methods.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [ALO00]
    Adya, A., Liskov, B., O’Neil, P.: Generalized Isolation Level Definitions. ICDE, San Diego (2000)Google Scholar
  2. [ABJ97]
    Atluri, V., Bertino, E., Jajodia, S.: A Theoretical Formulation for Degrees of Isolation in Databases. Information and Software Technology 39(1) (1997)Google Scholar
  3. [BBGM+95]
    Berenson, H., Bernstein, P., Gray, J., Melton, J., O’Neil, E., O’Neil, P.: A Critique of ANSI SQL Isolation Levels. In: SIGMOD, San Jose (1995)Google Scholar
  4. [BLL00]
    Bernstein, A.J., Lewis, P.M., Lu, S.: Semantic conditions for correctness at different isolation levels. ICDE, San Diego (2000)Google Scholar
  5. [BGRS91]
    Breitbart, Y., Georgakopoulos, D., Rusinkiewciz, M., Silberschatz, A.: On Rigorous Transaction. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 17(9) (1991)Google Scholar
  6. [BGS92]
    Breitbart, Y., Garcia-Molina, H., Silberschatz, A.: Overview of Multidatabase Transaction Management. VLDB Journal 1(2) (1992)Google Scholar
  7. [BHG87]
    Bernstein, P.A., Hadzilacos, V., Goodman, N.: Concurrency Control and Recovery in Database Systems. Addison Wesley Press, Reading (1987)Google Scholar
  8. [BS92]
    Breitbart, Y., Silberschatz, A.: Strong Recoverability in Multidatabase Systems, RIDE, Tempe (1992)Google Scholar
  9. [DSW94]
    Deacon, A., Schek, H.-J., Weikum, G.: Semantics-based Multilevel Transaction Management in Federated Systems. ICDE, Houston (1994)Google Scholar
  10. [FLO+99]
    Fekete, A., Liarokapis, D., O’Neil, E., O’Neil, P., Shasha, D.: Making Snapshot Isolation Data Item (1999) (Manuscript)Google Scholar
  11. [GRS94]
    Georgakopoulos, D., Rusinkiewicz, M., Sheth, A.P.: Using Tickets to Enforce the Serializability of Multidatabase Transactions. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 6(1) (February 1994)Google Scholar
  12. [HSC99]
    Hellerstein, J.M., Stonebraker, M., Caccia, R.: Independent, Open Enterprise Data Integration. IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin 22(1) (1999)Google Scholar
  13. [HWW98]
    Holtkamp, B., Weißenberg, N., Wu, X.: VHDBS: A Federated Database System for Electronic Commerce, EURO-MED NET (1998)Google Scholar
  14. [MK+99]
    Mattos, N.M., Kleewein, J., Roth, M.T., Zeidenstein, K.: From Object-Relational to Federated Databases. In: Buchmann, A.P. (ed.) German Database Conference, BTW (1999) (Invited Paper) Google Scholar
  15. [ÖV98]
    Özsu, M.T., Valduriez, P.: Principles of Distributed Database Systems, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1998)Google Scholar
  16. [Orac99]
    Oracle Corporation: Oracle8i Concepts: Chapter 27, Data Concurrency and Consistency (1999)Google Scholar
  17. [Raz92]
    Raz, Y.: The Principles of Commit Ordering or Guaranteeing Serializability in a Heterogeneous Environment of Multiple Autonomous Resource Mangers Using Atomic Commitment. VLDB, Vancouver (1992)Google Scholar
  18. [SL90]
    Sheth, A.P., Larson, J.A.: Federated Database System for Managing Distributed, Heterogeneous, and Autonomous Databases. ACM Computing Surveys 22(2) (1990)Google Scholar
  19. [SSW95]
    Schaad, W., Schek, H.-J., Weikum, G.: Implementation and Performance of Multi-level Transaction Management in a Multidatabase Environment. RIDE, Taipeh (1995)Google Scholar
  20. [Ston98]
    Stonebraker, M.: Are We Working On The Right Problems? (Panel). SIGMOD, Seattle (1998)Google Scholar
  21. [SW99]
    Schenkel, R., Weikum, G.: Experiences With Building a Federated Transaction Manager Based on CORBA OTS, In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Engineering Federated Information Systems, Kühlungsborn (1999)Google Scholar
  22. [SW+99]
    Schenkel, R., Weikum, G., Weißenberg, N., Wu, X.: Federated Transaction Management With Snapshot Isolation, In: Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Foundations of Models and Language for Data and Objects - Transactions and Database Dynamics, Schloß Dagstuhl, Germany (1999)Google Scholar
  23. [Weihl89]
    Weihl, W.E.: Local Atomicity Properties: Modular Concurrency Control for Abstract Data. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 11(2) (1989)Google Scholar
  24. [Wied92]
    Wiederhold, G.: Mediators in the Architecture of Future Information Systems. IEEE Computer 25(3) (1992)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ralf Schenkel
    • 1
  • Gerhard Weikum
    • 1
  1. 1.University of the SaarlandSaarbrücken

Personalised recommendations