Weak consistency and pessimistic replica control

  • Alain Sandoz
  • André Schiper
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 486)

Abstract

In distributed systems replication is used to enhance availability and performance. Concurrent access to copies on different sites must be synchronized so transactions remain serializable. The main difficulty is the possibility of a partition of the network due to site or communication failures. Several protocols have been designed to synchronize transactions running in different components. Most pessimistic algorithms restrict access to a unique component per object and impose mutual consistency of copies. In this paper we show that this is not necessary for pessimistic control. We present a forwarding strategy for missing updates and a method to globally order conflicting transactions in a partitioned system. This enables consistent views of objects in minority components, logical conflicts in different components and one-copy serializability. We present an algorithm based on these ideas which achieves higher availability than other pessimistic protocols. This leads us to define a new concept for control as opposed to the traditional adaptation/recovery paradigm for replica control.

Keywords

distributed systems replication serializability pessimism weak consistency 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    A.El Abbadi, S.Toueg: "The Group Paradigm for Concurrency Control Protocols", ACM-SIGMOD Conf. on Management of Data 6/1988, pp.126–134.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    A.El Abbadi, S. Toueg: "Maintaining Availability in Partitioned Replicated Databases", ACM Trans. on Database Systems, 14:2, 6/1989, pp.264–290.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    P.A.Bernstein, N.Goodman: "The Failure and Recovery Problem for Replicated Databases", ACM 2nd Annual Symp. on Principles of Distributed Computing 1983, pp.114–122.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    P.A.Bernstein, V.Hadzilacos, N.Goodman: "Concurrency Control and Recovery in Database Systems", Addison-Wesley 1987.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    B.K.Bhargava: "Concurrency Control and Reliability in Distributed Systems", chap. 1, van Nostrand-Reinhold, 1987.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    D. Davcev: "A Dynamic Voting Scheme in Distributed Systems", IEEE-TSE, 15:1, 1/1989, pp.93–97.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    S.B. Davidson: "Optimism and Consistency in Partitioned Distributed Database Systems", ACM Trans. on Database Systems, 9:3, 9/1984, pp.456–481.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    S.B. Davidson, H. Garcia-Molina, D. Skeen: "Consistency in Partitioned Networks", ACM Computing Surveys, 17:3, 9/1985, pp.341–370.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    D.L. Eager, K.C. Sevcik: "Achieving Robustness in Distributed Database Systems", ACM Trans. on Database Systems, 8:3, 9/1983, pp.354–381.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    K.P. Eswaran, J.N. Gray, R.A. Lorie, I.L. Traiger: "The Notions of Consistency and Predicate Locks in a Database System", Comms. of the ACM, 19:11, 11/1976, pp.624–633.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    H.Garcia-Molina, B.Kogan: "An implementation of Efficient Broadcast using an Unreliable Multicast Facility", 7th IEEE Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems, 10/1988, pp.101–111.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    D.K.Gifford: "Weighted Voting for Replicated Data", 7th ACM Symp. on Operating Systems Principles, 1979, pp.150–162.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    C.-L. Huang, V.O.K. Li: "Missing-Partition Dynamic Voting Scheme for Replicated Database Systems", 9th IEEE ICDCS, 1989, pp.579–586.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    C.-L. Huang, V.O.K. Li: "Regeneration-Based Multiversion Dynamic Voting Scheme for Replicated Database Systems", 10th IEEE ICDCS, Paris 1990; pp.370–377.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    S. Jajodia, D. Mutchler: "A Pessimistic Consistency Control Algorithm for Replicated Files which Achieves High Availability", IEEE-TSE, 15:1, 1/1989.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    J.E.B.Moss: "Nested Transactions, an Approach to Reliable Distributed Computing", MIT Press, 1985.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    G.Neiger, S.Toueg: "Automatically Increasing the Fault-Tolerance of Distributed Systems", ACM PODC 1989, pp.248–262.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    B.M.Oki, B.H.Liskov: "Viewstamped Replication: A New Primary Copy Method to Support Highly-Available Distributed Systems", 7th ACM Symp. on Principles of Distributed Computing, 8/1988, pp.8–17.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    A. Sandoz: "Achieving High Availability in a Replicated File System by Dynamically Ordering Transactions", 10th IEEE ICDCS, Paris, 6/1990, pp.432–439.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    M.Singhal: "Update Transport: A New Technique for Update Synchronization in Replicated Database Systems", to appear in IEEE-TSE, 12/1990.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alain Sandoz
    • 1
  • André Schiper
    • 1
  1. 1.Département d'InformatiqueEcole Polytechnique Fédérale de LausanneLausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations