Towards Context-Aware Transaction Services

  • Romain Rouvoy
  • Patricia Serrano-Alvarado
  • Philippe Merle
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4025)


For years, transactional protocols have been defined for particular application needs. Traditionally, when implementing a transaction service, a protocol is chosen and remains the same during the system execution. Nevertheless, the dynamic nature of nowadays application contexts (e.g., mobile, ad-hoc, peer-to-peer) and context variations (semantics-related aspects) motivates the need for transaction service adaptation. Next generation of transaction services should be adaptive or even better self-adaptive. This paper proposes CATE: (1) a component-based architecture of standard 2PC-based protocols and (2) a Context-Aware Transaction sErvice. Self-adaptation of CATE is obtained by context awareness and component-based reconfiguration. This allows CATE to select the most appropriate protocol with respect to the execution context. We show that using CATE performs better than using only one commit protocol in a variable system and that the reconfiguration cost is negligible.


Completion Time Adaptation Policy Execution Context Transaction Service Average Completion Time 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Preuveneers, D., Berbers, Y.: Adaptive Context Management Using a Component-based Approach. In: Kutvonen, L., Alonistioti, N. (eds.) DAIS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3543, pp. 14–26. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bruneton, E., Coupaye, T., Leclercq, M., et al.: An Open Component Model and its Support in Java. In: Crnković, I., Stafford, J.A., Schmidt, H.W., Wallnau, K. (eds.) CBSE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3054, pp. 7–22. Springer, Heidelberg (2004),
  3. 3.
    David, P., Ledoux, T.: Towards a Framework for Self-Adaptive Component-Based Applications. In: Stefani, J.-B., Demeure, I., Hagimont, D. (eds.) DAIS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2893, pp. 1–14. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Layaida, O., Hagimont, D.: Designing Self-Adaptive Multimedia Applications through Hierarchical Reconfiguration. In: Kutvonen, L., Alonistioti, N. (eds.) DAIS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3543, pp. 95–107. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    David, P., Ledoux, T.: Dynamic Adaptation of Non-Functional Concerns. In: Hernández, J., Moreira, A. (eds.) ECOOP-WS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2548. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Arntsen, A.B., Karlsen, R.: ReflecTS: a flexible transaction service framework. In: 4th Middleware Workshop on Adaptive and Reflective Middleware (ARM), Grenoble, France. AICPS, vol. 116, pp. 1–6. ACM Press, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Coulson, G., Blair, G., Grace, P., et al.: OpenCOM v2: A Component Model for Building Systems Software. In: IASTED Int. Conf. on Software Engineering and Applications (SEA), Cambridge, MA, ESA, pp. 1–6 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gray, J.: Notes on Database Operating Systems. In: Flynn, M.J., Jones, A.K., Opderbeck, H., Randell, B., Wiehle, H.R., Gray, J.N., Lagally, K., Popek, G.J., Saltzer, J.H. (eds.) Operating Systems. LNCS, vol. 60. Springer, Heidelberg (1978)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mohan, C., Lindsay, B., Obermarck, R.: Transaction Management in the R* Distributed Database Management System. ACM Trans. on Database Systems (TODS) 11(4) (1986)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Szyperski, C.: Component Software: Beyond Object-Oriented Programming. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Amsterdam (2002)MATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Seinturier, L., Pessemier, N., Duchien, L., et al.: A Component Model Engineered with Components and Aspects. In: Gorton, I., Heineman, G.T., Crnković, I., Schmidt, H.W., Stafford, J.A., Szyperski, C., Wallnau, K. (eds.) CBSE 2006. LNCS, vol. 4063. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yu, W., Wang, Y., Pu, C.: A Dynamic Two-Phase Commit Protocol for Self-Adapting Services. In: Int. Conf. on Services Computing (SCC), Shanghai, China, pp. 7–15. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Al-Houmaily, Y.J., Chrysanthis, P.K., Levitan, S.P.: Enhancing the performance of presumed commit protocol. In: Proc. of ACM Symp. on Applied computing (SAC), pp. 131–133. ACM Press, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Attaluri, G.K., Salem, K.: The Presumed-Either Two-Phase Commit Protocol. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 14(5), 1190–1196 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cheung, S.: Java Transaction Service Specification, Version 1.0 edn. Sun Microsystems Inc., San Antonio Road, Palo Alto (1999)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Garcia-Molina, H.: Using Semantic Knowledge for Transaction Processing in a Distributed Database. ACM Trans. on Database Systems (TODS) 8(2) (1983)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Serrano-Alvarado, P., Rouvoy, R., Merle, P.: Self-Adaptive Component-Based Transaction Commit Management. In: 4th Middleware Workshop on Adaptive and Reflective Middleware (ARM), Grenoble, France. AICPS, vol. 116, pp. 1–6. ACM Press, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chrysanthis, P.C., Samaras, G., Al-Houmail, Y.: Recovery and Performance of Atomic Commit Protocols in Distributed and Database Systems. In: Recovery Mechanisms in Database Systems. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1998)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liu, M.L., Agrawal, D., Abbadi, A.E.: The Performance of Two Phase Commit Protocols in the Presence of Site Failures. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht; Distributed and Parallel Databases (DAPD), 6(2) (1998)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rouvoy, R., Merle, P.: Towards a Model Driven Approach to Build Component-Based Adaptable Middleware. In: 3rd Middleware Workshop on Reflective and Adaptive Middleware (RAM), Toronto, Canada. AICPS, vol. 80, pp. 195–200. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rouvoy, R., Merle, P.: Using Microcomponents and Design Patterns to Build Evolutionary Transaction Services. In: Int. ERCIM Workshop on Software Evolution, Lille, France (to appear, 2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Romain Rouvoy
    • 1
  • Patricia Serrano-Alvarado
    • 2
  • Philippe Merle
    • 1
  1. 1.INRIA Futurs – Jacquard ProjectLIFL – University of Lille 1Villeneuve d’AscqFrance
  2. 2.ATLAS-GDD TeamLINA – University of NantesNantes Cedex 03France

Personalised recommendations