Encyclopedia of Database Systems

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

Transactional Stream Processing

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7993-3_80704-1



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

Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Hwang JH, Balazinska M, Rasin A, Cetintemel U, Stonebraker M, Zdonik S. High-availability algorithms for distributed stream processing. In: ICDE; 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: SIGMOD; 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: SOSP; 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. PVLDB. 2014;8(4):401–12.Google 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. PVLDB. 2015;8(12): 1792–1803.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Meehan J, Tatbul N, Zdonik S, Aslantas C, Cetintemel U, Du J, et al. S-store: streaming meets transaction processing. PVLDB. 2015;8(13): 2134–45.Google 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: SIGMOD; (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: EDBT; 2006. p. 608–26.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang D, Rundensteiner EA, Ellison RT. Active complex event processing over event streams. PVLDB. 2011;4(10):634–45.Google 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.Google 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. PVLDB. 2013;6(11):734–46.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Botan I, Fischer PM, Kossmann D, Tatbul N. Transactional stream processing. In: EDBT; 2012. p. 204–15.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kreps J, Narkhede N, Rao J. Kafka: a distributed messaging system for log processing. In: NetDB workshop; 2011.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Intel Labs and MITCambridgeUSA