Fine-granularity locking and client-based logging for distributed architectures

  • E. Panagos
  • A. Biliris
  • H. V. Jagadish
  • R. Rastogi
Performance
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1057)

Abstract

We present algorithms for fine-granularity locking and clientbased logging where all transactional facilities in a distributed clientserver architecture are provided locally. Multiple clients are allowed to concurrently modify different objects on the same page without synchronizing their updates. Each client has its own log disk where all log records for updates to locally cached data are written. Transaction rollback and client crash recovery are handled exclusively by the clients and local logs are not merged at any time. Clients can take checkpoints independently, and client clocks do not have to be synchronized.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    P. A. Bernstein, V. Hadzilacos, and N. Goodman. Concurrency Control and Recovery in Database Systems. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1987.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. J. Carey, D. J. DeWitt, M. J. Franklin, N. E. Hall, M. McAuliffe, J. F. Naughton, D. T. Schuh, and M. H. Solomon. Shoring up persistent applications. In Proceedings of ACM-SIGMOD 1994 International Conference on Management of Data, Minneapolis, Minnesota, pages 383–394, May 1994.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. J. Carey, M. J. Franklin, and M. Zaharioudakis. Fine-grained sharing in a page server OODBMS. In Proceedings of ACM-SIGMOD 1994 International Conference on Management of Data, Minneapolis, Minnesota, pages 359–370, May 1994.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    M.J. Carey, M. Franklin, M. Livny, and E. Shekita. Data caching tradeoffs in client-server DBMS architectures. In Proceedings of ACM-SIGMOD 1991 International Conference on Management of Data, Denver, Colorado, pages 357–366, May 1991.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Delis and N. Roussopoulos. Performance and scalability of client-server database architectures. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Very Large Databases, Vancouver, British Columbia, pages 610–623, August 1992.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. J. DeWitt, D. Maier, P. Futtersack, and F. Velez. A study of three alternative workstation-server architectures for object-oriented database systems. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Very Large Databases, Brisbane, pages 107–121, August 1990.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Franklin, M. Carey, and M. Livny. Local disk caching for client-server database systems. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth International Conference on Very Large Databases, Dublin, Ireland, pages 641–654, August 1993.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Franklin, M. Carey, and Livny M. Global memory management in client-server DBMS architectures. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Very Large Databases, Vancouver, British Columbia, pages 596–609, August 1992.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Franklin, M. Zwilling, C. Tan, M. Carey, and D. DeWitt. Crash recovery in client-server EXODUS. In Proceedings of ACM-SIGMOD 1992 International Conference on Management of Data, San Diego, California, pages 165–174, June 1992.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    T. Haerder and A. Reuter. Principles of transaction oriented database recovery — a taxonomy. ACM Computing Surveys, 15(4):289–317, December 1983.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. H. Howard, M. Kazarand, S. Menees, D. Nichols, M. Satyanarayanan, R. Sidebotham, and M. West. Scale and performance in a distributed file system. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 6(1):51–81, February 1988.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    H.V Jagadish, D.F. Lieuwen, R. Rastogi, A. Silberschatz, and S. Sudarshan. DALI: An extensible main memory storage manager. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Very Large Databases, Santiago, Chile, September 1994.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    C. Lamb, G. Landis, J. Orenstein, and D. Weinreb. The ObjectStore database system. Communications of the ACM, 34(10):51–63, October 1991.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Lomet. Recovery for Shared Disk Systems Using Multiple Redo Logs. Technical Report CLR 90/4, Digital Equipment Corp., Cambridge Research Lab, Cambridge, MA., Oct. 1990.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    D. Lomet, R. Anderson, T.K. Rengarajan, and P. Spiro. How the Rdb/VMS data sharing system became fast. Technical Report CRL 92/4, Digital Equipment Corporation Cambridge Research Lab, 1992.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    C. Mohan, D. Haderle, B. Lindsay, H. Pirahesh, and P. Schwarz. ARIES: A transaction recovery method supporting fine-granularity locking and partial rollbacks using write-ahead logging. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 17(1):94–162, March 1992.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    C. Mohan and I. Narang. Recovery and coherency-control protocols for fast intersystem page transfer and fine-granularity locking in a shared disks transaction environment. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Very Large Databases, Barcelona, Spain, pages 193–207, September 1991.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    C. Mohan and I. Narang. ARIES/CSA: a method for database recovery in clientserver architectures. Proceedings of ACM-SIGMOD 1994 International Conference on Management of Data, Minneapolis, Minnesota, pages 55–66, May 1994.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    C. Mohan, I. Narang, and S. Silen. Solutions to Hot Spot Problems in a Shared Disks Transaction Environment. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on High Performance Transaction Systems, September 1991. Also, in IBM Research Report RJ8281 (August 1991).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    E. Panagos, A. Biliris, H.V. Jagadish, and R. Rastogi. Client-based logging for high performance distributed architectures. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Data Engineering, New Orleans, Louisiana, February 1996. To appear.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    E. Rahm. Recovery Concepts for Data Sharing Systems. In Proc. 21st Int. Conf. on Fault-Tolerant Computing, Montreal, June 1991.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    T. Rengarajan, P. Spiro, and W. Wright. High availability machanisms of VAX DBMS software. Digital Technical Journal 8, pages 88–98, February 1989.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    M. Satyanarayanan, K.J. Kistler, P. Kumar, M.E. Okasaki, E.H. Siegel, and D.C. Steere. Coda: A highly available file system for a distributed workstation environment. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 39(4), April 1990.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Versant Object Technology, Menlo Park, California. VERSTANT System Reference Manual, Release 1.6, 1991.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Y. Wang and L. A. Rowe. Cache consistency and concurrency control in client/server DBMS architecture. In Proceedings of ACM-SIGMOD 1991 International Conference on Management of Data, Denver, Colorado, pages 367–376, May 1991.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    K. Wilkinson and M. A. Neimat. Maintaining consistency of client-cached data. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Very Large Databases, Brisbane, pages 122–133, August 1990.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Panagos
    • 1
    • 2
  • A. Biliris
    • 2
  • H. V. Jagadish
    • 2
  • R. Rastogi
    • 2
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentBoston UniversityBoston
  2. 2.AT&T Bell LaboratoriesMurray Hill

Personalised recommendations