Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Correctness Criteria Beyond Serializability

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Encyclopedia of Database Systems

  • 29 Accesses

Synonyms

Concurrency control; Preserving database consistency

Definition

A transaction is a logical unit of work that includes one or more database access operations such as insertion, deletion, modification, and retrieval [7]. A schedule (or history) S of n transactions T1,…,Tn is an ordering of the transactions that satisfies the following two conditions: (i) the operations of Ti (i = 1,…,n) in S must occur in the same order in which they appear in Ti, and (ii) the operations of Tj (j ≠ i) may be interleaved with Ti’s operations in S. A schedule S is serial if for every two transactions Ti and Tj that appear in S, either all the operations of Ti appear before all the operations of Tj or vice versa. Otherwise, the schedule is called nonserial or concurrent. Nonserial schedules of transactions may lead to issues with the correctness of the schedule due to concurrency such as lost update, dirty read, and unrepeatable read. For instance, the lost update problem occurs whenever two...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 4,499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 6,499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Recommended Reading

  1. Bernstein PA, Goodman N. Multiversion concurrency control – theory and algorithms. ACM Trans Database Syst. 1983;8(4):465–83.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Bernstein PA, Hadzilacos V, Goodman N. Concurrency control and recovery in database systems. Reading: Addison-Wesley; 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dayal U, Hsu M, Ladin R. Business process coordination: state of the art, trends, and open issues. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases; 2001. p. 3–13.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Du W, Elmagarmid AK. Quasi serializability: a correctness criterion for global concurrency control in Interbase. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases; 1989. p. 347–55.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Eswaran KP, Gray J, Lorie RA, Traiger IL. The notions of consistency and predicate locks in a database system. Commun ACM. 1976;19(11):624–33.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Garcia-Molina H. Using semantic knowledge for transaction processing in a distributed database. ACM Trans Database Syst. 1983;8(2):186–213.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Gray J, Reuter A. Transaction processing: concepts and techniques. Los Altos: Morgan Kaufmann; 1993.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Gray J, Lorie RA, Putzolu GR, Traiger IL. Granularity of locks in a large shared data base. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Very Data Bases; 1975. p. 428–51.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Korth HF, Speegle GD. Formal model of correctness without serializability. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data; 1988. p. 379–86.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Mehrotra S, Rastogi R, Korth HF, Silberschatz A. Ensuring consistency in multidatabases by preserving two-level serializability. ACM Trans Database Syst. 1998;23(2):199–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Papadimitriou CH. The serializability of concurrent database updates. J ACM. 1979;26(4):631–53.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Papadimitriou CH. The theory of database concurrency control. Rockville: Computer Science; 1986.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Ramamritham K, Pu C. A formal characterization of epsilon serializability. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng. 1995;7(6):997–1007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sheth A, Leu Y, Elmagarmid A. Maintaining consistency of interdependent data in multidatabase systems. Technical Report CSD-TR-91-016, Purdue University. 1991. http://www.cs.toronto.edu/georgem/ws/ws.ps

  15. Yannakakis M. Serializability by locking. J ACM. 1984;31(2):227–44.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Qatar Computing Research Institute, HBKU, Doha, Qatar

    Mourad Ouzzani & Ahmed K. Elmagarmid

  2. The University of Michigan – Dearborn, Dearborn, MI, USA

    Brahim Medjahed

  3. Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA

    Ahmed K. Elmagarmid

Authors
  1. Mourad Ouzzani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Brahim Medjahed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ahmed K. Elmagarmid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mourad Ouzzani .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Georgia Institute of Technology College of Computing, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Ling Liu

  2. University of Waterloo School of Computer Science, Waterloo, ON, Canada

    M. Tamer Özsu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Ouzzani, M., Medjahed, B., Elmagarmid, A.K. (2018). Correctness Criteria Beyond Serializability. In: Liu, L., Özsu, M.T. (eds) Encyclopedia of Database Systems. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8265-9_722

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation