Advertisement

Fehlertolerantes Koordinieren verteilter autonomer Dienste

Conference paper
  • 28 Downloads
Part of the Informatik aktuell book series (INFORMAT)

Abstract

Die Vernetzung von Rechnern führt zu neuen Einsatzbereichen und daher zu neuen Anforderungen an Programmiersprachen. Programmierung war bisher meist mit Erstellung von Softwarepaketen für einen Rechner gleichzusetzen. Sequentielle Programmiersprachen werden verwendet, die weder die Kommunikation zwischen parallelen Prozessen noch deren Synchronisation unterstützen. Neue, verteilte Programmiersprachen sind mit der Koordinierung von in einem im Netz angebotenen autonomen Diensten konfrontiert. Ähnliche Aufgaben entstehen bei der Verwaltung von Teilaufgaben in einem Projekt. Fehler und Ausfälle einzelner Komponenten sollten die Erfolgschance der Gesamtaufgabe nicht verhindern.

Wir beschreiben Techniken zur Koordination solcher Aufgaben. Die vorgeschlagenen Konzepte konnen in herkömmliche Programmiersprachen eingebaut werden. Wir zeigen, warum das logische Programmierparadigma besonders gut geeignet ist.

Schlüsselworte

Verteilte Sprachen Koordination Parallelität logische Programmierung Fehlertoleranz 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [Bal92]
    H. Bal. Fault-tolerant parallel programming in Argus. Concurrency: Practice and Experience:, 4 (1): 37–55, February 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [BHG87]
    Ph. Bernstein, V. Hadzilacos, and N. Goodman. Concurrency Control and Recovery in Database Systems. Addison-Wesley, 1987.Google Scholar
  3. [BKP92]
    O. Bukhres, e. Kühn, and F. Puntigam. A language multidatabase system communication protocol. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Data Engineering. IEEE Computer Society Press, April 1992. (to appear).Google Scholar
  4. [BST89]
    H. Bal, J. Steiner, and A. Tanenbaum. Programming languages for distributed computing systems. ACM Computing Surveys, 21 (3), September 1989.Google Scholar
  5. [BT91]
    H. Bal and S. Tanenbaum. Distributed programming with shared data. Computer Languages Journal, 16 (2): 129 - 146, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [Dij75]
    E. Dijkstra. Guarded commands, nondeterminacy, and formal derivation of programs. Communications of the ACM, 18 (8), August 1975.Google Scholar
  7. [ELLR90]
    A. K. Elmagarmid, Y. Leu, W. Litwin, and M. Rusinkiewicz. A multidatabase transaction model for InterBase. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, Australia, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. [Elm91]
    A. K. Elmagarmid, editor. Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1991.Google Scholar
  9. [GC92]
    D. Gelernter and N. Carriero. Coordination languages and their significance. Commu-nications of the ACM, 35 (2), February 1992.Google Scholar
  10. [GMS87]
    H. Garcia-Molina and K. Salem. Sagas. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD Annual Conference, San Francisco, May 1987.Google Scholar
  11. [Gre87]
    S. Gregory. Parallel Logic Programming in PARLOG. The Language and its Implementation. Addison-Wesley, England, 1987.Google Scholar
  12. [KP92]
    e. Kühn and F. Puntigam. Reliable communication in VPl,. In Proceedings of the Parallel Architectures and Languages Europe (PARLE-92), Paris, June 15–18 1992. Springer Verlag, LNCS.Google Scholar
  13. [KPE92]
    e. Kühn, F. Puntigam, and A. K. Elmagarmid. An execution model for distributed database transactions and its implementation in VPL- In Proceedings of the International Conference on Extending Database Technology, EDBT’92 Vienna, March 1992. Springer Verlag, LNCS.Google Scholar
  14. [KPP93]
    e. Kühn, H. Pohlai, and F. Puntigam. Concurrency and backtracking in Vienna Parallel Logic. Computer Languages Journal, 1993. to appear.Google Scholar
  15. [LHHK92]
    J. Lee, Wenwey H., E. Hilsdale, and G. E. Kaiser. Dynamic orthogonal composition in meldc. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Objects in Large Distributed Applications, Vancouver BC, Canada, October 1992.Google Scholar
  16. [Lis88]
    B. Liskov. Distributed programming in Argus. Communications of the ACM, 31 (3): 300–312, March 1988.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [LS87]
    B. Liskov and R. Scheifer. Guardians and actions: Linguistic support for robust, distributed programs. In B. Bhargava, editor, Concurrency Control and Reliability in Database Systems. Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1987.Google Scholar
  18. [Pan91]
    C. Pancake. Software support for parallel computing: Where are we headed? Communications of the ACM, 34 (11), November 1991.Google Scholar
  19. [Sha87]
    E. Shapiro. Concurrent Prolog, Collected Papers, volume 1-2. The MIT Press, 1987.Google Scholar
  20. [Sha89]
    E. Shapiro. The family of concurrent logic programming languages. ACM Computing Surveys, 21 (3): 412–510, September 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [SS86]
    L. Sterling and E. Shapiro. The Art of Prolog. The MIT Press, 1986.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. [WWC92]
    G. Wiederhold, P. Wegner, and S. Ceri. Toward megaprogramming. Communications of the ACM, 35 (11), November 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institut für ComputersprachenTechnische Unversität WienWienÖsterreich

Personalised recommendations

Cite paper

Buy options