Exploiting semantic of typed objects under an optimistic control in the transactional deferred update model: A promising approach

  • Malika Mahoui-Guerni
Database Updates
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1341)


The transactional deferred update (DU) model is typically used in client/server DBMS. When typed objects are used, greater concurrency is possible by exploiting properties such as commutativity of typed operations. To extract concurrency from objects, for the DU model, theoretical studies based on dependency graph model emphasized different types of dependencies between operations. Dependencies allow to specify possible concurrency between operations even if they do not “forward” commute. In this paper we exploit these dependencies in a new optimistic concurrency control scheme based on timestamps intervals. The protocol achieves the highest concurrency when the semantic of typed operations is exploited. The scheme uses a backward control to achieve serializability, and a forward control to detect earlier non serializable situations. This study shows that, unlike previous semantic objects-based protocols, the new protocol is very adapted to client/server architectures.


Transactional Deferred Update Model Concurrency Typed Objects Forward Commutativity Dependencies Certification 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Badrinah, BR., Ramamritham, K.: Semantics-based concurrency control: beyond commutativity. ACM transactions on database systems 17 1992 163–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bancilhon, F., Delobel, C., Kanellekis, P.: Building an object oriented database system: the story of o2. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, Cal. 1992.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bernstein, P.A., Hadzilacos, V., Goodman, N.: Concurrency control and recovery in database systems. Addison-Wesley Publishing, Reading, Mass. 1987.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boksenbaum, C., Cart, M., Ferrié, J., Pons, J.F.: Concurrent certification by intervals of timestamps in distributed database systems. IEEE transactions on software engineering 13 1987 409–418.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cart, M., Ferrié, J., Richy, H.: Contrôle de l'exécution de transactions concurrentes. Technique et science informatiques 8 1989 225–240.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cart, M., Ferrié, J., Guerni, M., Pons, J.F.: The impact of typed objects on the Update In Place and Deferred Update transaction models. Proc. 9th International symposium on computer and information sciences, Antalaya, Turkey 1994 89–96.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chrysanthis, P.K., Raghuram, S., Ramamritham, K.: Extracting concurrency from objects: A methodology. Proc. of the International conference on the management of data, Denver, Colorado, USA 1991 108–117.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ferrié, J., Guerni, M., Pons, J.F.: Extracting concurrency form objects in the transactional deferred update model. 12th days in advanced databases, Cassis, France 1996.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Franklin, M.J., Carey, M.J., Livny, M.: Local disk caching for client-server database systems. Proc. of the 19th International conference on very large databases, Dublin, Ireland 1993 641–654.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gray, J., Reuter, A.: Transaction processing. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, Cal. 1993.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guerni, M.: Implementation techniques of the transactional Deferred Update model when exploiting typed objects in distributed systems. Proc. European research seminar on advances in distributed systems, Grenoble 1995 177–182.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guerni, M.: The impact of typed objects on the deferred update transactional model for concurrency and recovery. PhD. thesis, Montpellier II University 1995.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Guerni, M., Ferrié, J., Pons, J.F.: Concurrency and recovery for typed objects using a new commutativity relation. Proc. 4th International conference on deductive and object-oriented databases, Singapore 1995 411–428.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Halici, U., Dogac, A.: Concurrency control in distributed databases through time intervals and short-term locks. IEEE transactions on software engineering 15 1987 994–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Härder, T.: Observation on optimistic concurrency control schemes. Information systems 9 1984 111–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Herlihy, M.: Apologizing versus asking permission: Optimistic concurrency control for abstract data types. ACM transactions on database systems 15 1990 96–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Herlihy, M.: Hybrid concurrency control for abstract data types. Journal of computer and system science 43 1991 25–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kung, H.T., Robinson, J.T.: On optimistic methods for concurrency control. ACM transactions on database-systems 6 1984 213–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lamb, C., Landis, G., Orenstein, J., Weinreb, D.: The Object Store database system. Communications of the ACM 34 1991 51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liskov, B., Day, M., Shrira, L.: Distributed object management in Thor. Distributed object management. Morgan Kufmann 1993 79–91.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Objectivity Inc., Objectivity /DB Documentation 1 1991.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ontos Incorporate, Ontos DB 2.2, Reference Manuel 1992.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Özsu, M.T., Valduriez, P.: Principles of distributed database systems. Prentice Hall 1991.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Roesler, M., Burkhard, W.: Concurrency control scheme for shared objects: A peephole based on semantics. Proc. 7th International Conference on distributed computing systems 1987 224–231.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schwarz, P.M., Spector, A.Z.: Synchronizing shared abstract types. ACM transactions on computer systems 26 1984 223–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Versant object technology, Versant system reference manuel. Release 1.6, Menlo Park 1991.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Weihl, W.E.: Commutativity-based concurrency control for abstract data types. IEEE transactions on computers 37 1988 1488–1505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Weihl, W.E.: The impact of recovery on concurrency control. Proc. of the ACM symposium on principles of database systems, Philadelphie 1989 259–269.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Malika Mahoui-Guerni
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceWaikato UniversityHamilton

Personalised recommendations