Encyclopedia of Database Systems

2018 Edition
| Editors: Ling Liu, M. Tamer Özsu

Transactional Stream Processing

  • Nesime Tatbul
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8265-9_80704

Synonyms

Streaming OLTP

Definition

We can broadly define transactional stream processing as processing streaming data with correctness guarantees. These guarantees include not only properties that are intrinsic to stream processing (e.g., order, exactly-once semantics), but also ACID properties of traditional OLTP-oriented databases, which arise in streaming applications in case of shared mutable state or failures.

Historical Background

Stream processing emerged as a research area in the database community circa early 2000s. The initial focus of the community was on enabling relational-style query processing over ordered and unbounded data from push-based data sources such as sensors. New models, algorithms, and systems were developed to achieve low-latency continuous processing over streams arriving at high or unpredictable rates. Storing streaming data for longer term use beyond answering real-time continuous queries was not a primary concern. Thus, storage management was limited to...

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

References

  1. 1.
    Hwang JH, Balazinska M, Rasin A, Cetintemel U, Stonebraker M, Zdonik S. High-availability algorithms for distributed stream processing. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Data Engineering; 2005. p. 779–90.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Toshniwal A, Taneja S, Shukla A, Ramasamy K, Patel JM, Kulkarni S, et al. Storm @Twitter. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data; 2014. p. 147–56.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zaharia M, Das T, Li H, Hunter T, Shenker S, Stoica I. Discretized streams: fault-tolerant streaming computation at scale. In: Proceedings of the 24th ACM Symposium on Operating System Principles; 2013. p. 423–38.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chandramouli B, Goldstein J, Barnett M, DeLine R, Fisher D, Platt JC, et al. Trill: a high-performance incremental query processor for diverse analytics. Proc VLDB Endow. 2014;8(4):401–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Akidau T, Bradshaw R, Chambers C, Chernyak S, Fernandez-Moctezuma RJ, Lax R, et al. The dataflow model: a practical approach to balancing correctness, latency, and cost in massive-scale, unbounded, out-of-order data processing. Proc VLDB Endow. 2015;8(12):1792–1803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Meehan J, Tatbul N, Zdonik S, Aslantas C, Cetintemel U, Du J, et al. S-store: streaming meets transaction processing. Proc VLDB Endow. 2015;8(13):2134–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ramnarayan J, Mozafari B, Wale S, Menon S, Kumar N, Bhanawat H, et al. SnappyData: streaming, transactions, and interactive analytics in a unified engine. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data; (2016, to appear).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Arasu A, Babu S, Widom J. The CQL continuous query language: semantic foundations and query execution. VLDB J. 2006;15(2):121–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Golab L, Bijay KG, Ozsu MT. On concurrency control in sliding window queries over data streams. In: Advances in Database Technology, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Extending Database Technology; 2006. p. 608–26.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang D, Rundensteiner EA, Ellison RT. Active complex event processing over event streams. Proc VLDB Endow. 2011;4(10):634–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Balazinska M, Balakrishnan H, Madden SR, Stonebraker M. Fault-tolerance in the Borealis distributed stream processing system. ACM TODS. 2008;33(1):3:1–3:44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Akidau T, Balikov A, Bekiroglu K, Chernyak S, Haberman J, Lax R, et al. MillWheel: fault-tolerant stream processing at Internet scale. Proc VLDB Endow. 2013;6(11):734–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Botan I, Fischer PM, Kossmann D, Tatbul N. Transactional stream processing. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Extending Database Technology; 2012. p. 204–15.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kreps J, Narkhede N, Rao J. Kafka: a distributed messaging system for log processing. In: Proceedings of the NetDB Workshop; 2011.Google Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Intel Labs and MITCambridgeUSA