Advertisement

Managing overlapping transactional workflows

  • Juha Puustjärvi
  • Henry Tirri
  • Jari Veijalainen
Workflow Management and Distributed Information Systems
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1080)

Abstract

Workflow management techniques have become an intensive area of research in information systems. In large scale workflow systems modularity and reusability of existing task structures with context dependent (parametrized) task execution are essential components of a successful application. In this paper we study the issues related to management of overlapping transactional workflows, i.e., workflows that share component tasks and thus avoid redundancy in design. The notion of parametrized transactional properties of workflow tasks is introduced and analyzed, and the underlying implementation mechanism based on Event/Condition/Action (ECA) rules is discussed.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    M. Attie, M. Singh, A. Sheth, and M. Rusinkiewicz. Specifying and enforcing intertask dependencies. In The 19th International Conference on VLDB, 1993.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. Bernstein, V. Hadzilacos, and N. Goodman. Concurrency Control and Recovery in Database Systems. Addison-Wesley, 1987.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. Biliris, S. Dar, N. Gehani, H. Jagadish, and K. Ramamritham. Asset: A system for supporting extended transactions. SIGMOD Record, 23(2), June 1994.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Y. Breitbart, A. Deacon, H.-J. Schek, A. Sheth, and G. Weikum. Merging application-centric and data-centric approaches to support transaction-oriented multi-system workflows. Sigmod Record, 22(3), September 1993.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    C. Bussler and S. Jablonski. Implementing agent coordination for workflow management systems using active database systems. In S. Chakravarthy and S. Urban, editors, IEEE Proceedings Research Interests in Data Engineering: Active Database Systems (RIDE'94), 1994.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    U. Dayal, M. Hsu, and R. Ladin. A transaction model for long-running activities. In The 17th International Conference on VLDB, 1991.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    U. Dayl, M. Hsu, and R. Ladin. Organizing long-running activities with triggers and transactions. In ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. de By, A. Lehtola, O. Pihlajamaa, J. Veijalainen, and J. Wäsch. A reference architecture for cooperative transaction processing systems. Technical Report 1694, Technical Research Centre of Finland, 1995.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Elmagarmid, Y. Leu, W. Litwin, and M. Rusinkiewicz. A multibase transaction model for interbase. In The 16th International International Conference on VLDB, 1990.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    K.P. Eswaran, J.N. Gray, P.A. Lorie, and I.L. Traiger. The notions of consistency and predicate locks in a database system. Communications of the ACM, 19(11), November 1976.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    H. Garcia-Molina, D. Gawlick, J. Klein, K. Kleissner, and K. Salem. Modeling long-running activities as nested sagas. IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin, 14(1), March 1991.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. Garcia-Molina and K. Salem. Sagas. In ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, 1987.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    D. Georgakopoulos and M. Hornick. A framework for enforceable specification of extended transaction models and transactional workflows. Journal of Intelligent and Cooperative Information Systems, September 1994.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. Gray and A. Reuter. Transaction Processing: Concepts and Techniques. Morgan Kaufmann, 1993.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    W. Harrison, H. Ossher, and P. Sweeney. Coordinating concurrent development. In Proceedings of the Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 1990.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    K. Jensen. Colored Petri Nets. Springer-Verlag, 1991.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    S. Joosten. Trigger modeling for workflow analysis. In Proceedings of CON'94: Workflow Management, Challenges, Paradigms and Products, 1994.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    G. Kaiser. Flexible transaction model for software engineering. In Proceedings of Sixth International Conference on Data Engineering, 1990.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    G. Kaiser and C. Pu. Dynamic restructuring of transactions. In A.K. Elmagarmid, editor, Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications, chapter 8. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1992.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    N.A. Lynch. Multilevel atomicity — a new correctness criteria for database concurrency control. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 8(4), December 1983.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    C. Mohan, G. Alonso, R. Günthör, and M. Kamath. Exotica: A research perspective on workflow management systems. Bulletin of the IEEE Technical Committee on Data Engineering, 18(1), March 1995.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    J.E.B. Moss. Nested Transactions: An Approach to Reliable Distributed Computing. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1985.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    K. Narayanaswamy and K. Goldman. “Lazy” consistency: A basis for cooperative software development. In Proceedings of the Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 1992.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    M. Nodine, S. Ramaswamy, and S. Zdonik. A cooperative transaction model for design databases. In A.K. Elmagarmid, editor, Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications, chapter 3. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1992.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    P.E. O'neil. The escrow transactional method. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 11(4), December 1986.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    C. Pu and N. Hutchinson. Split transactions for open ended activities. In The 14th International Conference on VLDB, 1988.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    J. Tang and J. Veijalainen. Enforcing inter-task dependencies in transactional workflows. In Proceedings of the the Third International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS-95), 1995.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    T. Tesch and P. Verkoulen. Transcoop deliverable ii.2. Technical Report TC/REP/GMD/D2-2/207, ESPRIT Basic Research Action 8012, 1995.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    J. Veijalainen. Heterogeneous multilevel transaction management with multiple subtransactions. In Proceedings of the DEXA '93, 1993.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    J. Veijalainen, F. Eliassen, and B. Holtkamp. The s-transaction model. In A.K. Elmagarmid, editor, Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications, chapter 12. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1992.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    W. Wächter. Contracts: A means for improving reliability in distributed computing. In IEEE COMPCON, 1991.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    H. Wähter and A. Reuter. The contract model. In A.K. Elmagarmid, editor, Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications, chapter 7. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1992.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    G. Weikum and H. Schek. Concepts and applications of multilevel transactions and open nested transactions. In A.K. Elmagarmid, editor, Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications, chapter 13. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juha Puustjärvi
    • 1
  • Henry Tirri
    • 1
  • Jari Veijalainen
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of HelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.VTT Information TechnologyMultimedia SystemsFinland

Personalised recommendations