Logging and recovery in PRISMA

  • C. A. van den Berg
  • M. L. Kersten
PRISMA Contributions
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 503)


The recovery methods for main-memory database systems are mostly based on maintaining a disk based log and checkpoint. The information written to the log usually consists of low level information, before-after images or single tuple updates. In this paper we examine the effect of writing higher level update information to the log. This results in less logging overhead during normal processing, but an increased replay overhead during recovery.

We introduce a cost model for analyzing the effect of higher level logging on the transaction throughput, and present the results of a performance analysis based on this cost model.

Key Words & Phrases

main memory database machines logging and recovery performance analysis 

1985 Mathematics Subject Classification

69H22 69H26 69C40 69C24 

1990 CR Categories

H.2.2 H.2.6 C.2.4 C.4 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [AD85]
    Rakesh Agrawal and David J. DeWitt. Recovery architectures for multiprocessor database machines. In Proc. SIGMOD, 1985.Google Scholar
  2. [Ame88]
    P. America. Language definition of pool-x. PRISMA document Doc. Nr. 350, Philips Research Laboratories, September 1988.Google Scholar
  3. [CBDU75]
    K.M. Chandy, J.C Browne, C. Dissly, and W.R. Uhrig. Analytic models for rollback and recovery strategies in database systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1, March 1975.Google Scholar
  4. [CKKS89]
    G. Copeland, T. Keller, R. Krishnamurthy, and M. Smith. The case for safe ram. In Proc. of the 15th International Conference on Very Large Databases, 1989.Google Scholar
  5. [CP84]
    S. Ceri and G. Pelagatti. Distributed Databases, Principles and Systems. McGraw-Hill, 1984.Google Scholar
  6. [DKO+84]
    D.J. DeWitt, R. Katz, F. Olken, L. Shapiro, M. Stonebreaker, and D.Wood. Implementation techniques for main memory database systems. In Proc. ACM SIGMOD Conference, pages 1–8, June 1984.Google Scholar
  7. [Eic87]
    Margaret H. Eich. A classification and comparison of main memory database recovery techniques. In Proc. of the 1987 Database Enginering Conference, pages 332–339, 1987.Google Scholar
  8. [HR83]
    Theo Haerder and Andreas Reuter. Principles of transaction-oriented database recovery. Computing Surveys, 15(4), December 1983.Google Scholar
  9. [KAH+87]
    Martin L. Kersten, Peter M.G. Apers, Maurice A.W. Houtsma, Erik J.A. van Kuyk, and Rob L.W. van de Weg. A distributed, main-memory database machine. In Proc. of the Fith International Workshop on Database Machines, pages 353–369, October 1987.Google Scholar
  10. [LC87]
    Tobin J. Lehman and Michael J. Carey. A recovery algorithm for a high-performance memory-resident database system. In Proc. SIGMOD, 1987.Google Scholar
  11. [Mul87]
    H. Muller. Hardware aspects of fault tolerance. PRISMA document P121, University of Amsterdam, June 1987.Google Scholar
  12. [Reu84]
    Andreas Reuter. Performance analysis of recovery techniques. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 9(4):526–559, December 1984.Google Scholar
  13. [WG89]
    A. Wilschut and P. Grefen. Xra definition. PRISMA document P465, Twente University, September 1989.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. A. van den Berg
    • 1
  • M. L. Kersten
    • 1
  1. 1.CWIAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations