N. Lynch, M. Merri , W. Weihl and A. Feke e. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1994.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....is satisfied, the CA action has aborted and no state change has happened, or the CA action has failed. Each role returns from a call whenever the corresponding instance terminates. 5 Enclosure Property The enclosure property (often referred to as atomicity in the area of transaction processing [LMWF94] of a CA action can be summarized as follows: 1) Information can be passed only at the entrance and exit of the CA action, and 2) During the execution of the action (i.e. between the begin and end of the action) a role inside that action cannot interact or communicate in any way with a role or ....

N. Lynch, M. Merrit, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

....environment. 2. To enable further advanced studies which complement this course: in the final course project during the second term of the fifth year of the engineering degree, or at master level. As there are no support texts fully encompassing the course topics we are using multiple sources [5, 13, 14, 17] and some significant papers concerning algorithm design. An integrated view of all these elements is given to the students in a set of lecture notes [6] In [18] a prediction is made that in the long term specific parallel computing courses may well tend to disappear, and be subsumed within ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

....optimistic WG SG F 6 F 6 P 5 [7] none SG = strongly generatable WG = weakly generatable SR = strongly revocable = with weak termination TABLE 2. Summary of the protocol compositions and achievable fairness levels depending on item properties. concept which is quite well understood [53]. Also, atomic commitment protocols like two phase commit (2PC) 54] can be adapted quite easily to enable fair exchange. Consequently, the transactional view has lead to fair exchange protocols requiring transaction coordinators which in terms of fair exchange resemble an active trusted third ....

Lynch, N. A., Merritt, M., Weihl, W., and Fekete, A. (1994) Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA.

....consider higher level abstractions involving e.g. notions of atomicity (see requirement 7.2) recovery or replication [18] 7.2 Supporting atomic activities Description A global computing programming model should provide support for notions of atomic activities. Rationale Atomic transactions [22, 28] have emerged as a key abstraction for building resilient distributed systems. One should expect a global computing programming model to provide support for such abstractions, either in the form of in built constructs (see e.g. the ATF calculus [11] or derived ones (see e.g. the construction of ....

N. Lynch, M. Merrit, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

....particular, as an exercise in serialisability theory, another case of a distant area of computer science concerned with notions of process, namely concurrency control theory from the database world, having an impact on a problem in process algebra. In this regard, the recent work on atomicity of [Lynch et al. 1994)] see also references therein) bears comparison with the contents of this paper. Certainly the complexity of the serialisability proofs there is rather reminiscent of what appears in the present paper. Pursuing the analogy for a moment, we can view the communications of a re calculus expression ....

Lynch N., Merritt M., Weihl W., Fekete A., Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, (1994).

....among many possible formal tools for reasoning about systems expressed as timed automata, but they are among the most powerful for proving safety properties. The value of the simulation method for verifying safety properties of untimed systems is now well established. Many papers and books, e.g. [3, 15, 19, 21,23, 32, 38, 42], contain substantial examples of its use. Also see [14] for a persuasive discussion of the value of the technique. The use of this method for timed systems is much newer, but appears very promising. Preliminary results appear in [20, 38] 3.1 Simulations In this subsection, I define the basic ....

....relative to the part that occurs at another. For examples of such algorithms in the timed setting, consider the transformations described by Neiger and Toueg [30] and by Chaudhuri et al. 5] In the untimed setting, this style of reasoning occurs in arguments about database concurrency control [21], and about synchronizers [2, 7] It also occurs in arguments about algorithms that have the structure of communication closed layers [9] Several other examples have been verified, or partially verified, using the methods of this paper. These include a timed protocol for at most once message ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1994.

....Gray93] Atomicity requires that each transaction either completes successfully or leaves the system unchanged. Atomic transactions eliminate the need for programmers to interpret and correct incomplete state changes and therefore greatly simplify the process of coping with errors [Lomet77, Lynch94] Consistency implies that each transaction in the system is only allowed to introduce valid state changes to the system. For example, a transaction would not be permitted to withdraw 100 from an account with a balance of 50. 16 Transactions are frequently used in systems that are ....

....that it made to system state will survive subsequent faults such as loss of power and system crash. Transactions, are an important programming paradigm that have been widely embraced by developers of complex fault tolerant systems, such as those used in database applications [Bernstein87, Gray93, Lynch94] In addition to guaranteeing ACID semantics, systems based upon transactions provide recovery on a per transaction basis. Recovery is typically accomplished by recording information in a durable log that is used by a recovery manager to either remove the effects of transactions which failed ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Lynch, N., Merrit, M., Weihl, W. and Fekete, A. Atomic Transactions. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers (1994).

....This paper formalizes a limited form of interaction by two alternative equivalent models: PTMs and SIMs. Our model is related to formalizations of process models of observability [Mi2] reactive systems by temporal logis [MP] speci cation models of data abstraction [Br] and input output automata [Ly]. It shows how PTMs can be de ned by a minimal extension of TMs and that making memory persistent (an inner property) corresponds to making the machine interactive (an outer property) The ability to remember elevates the expressiveness of PTMs above that of TMs, giving them a sense of identity. ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

....the encapsulation of multiple actions. Transactions provide fault con nement and simplify reasoning about the properties of applications. Within the MAFTIA framework we will support two types of transactions: atomic transactions, and coordinated atomic actions. The well known atomic transactions [61] style of interaction allows the grouping of a set of operations into a single higher level action that either completes successfully or has its e ects undone. Additionally transactions guarantee the properties of atomicity, consistency, isolation and durability (ACID) Atomicity is the property ....

N. A. Lynch. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, 1993.

....Specifically, a committed transaction may reflect inappropriate and or malicious activity. There are two common approaches to handling the problem of undesirable but committed transactions: rollback and compensation. The rollback approach, sometimes formalized in a nested transaction model [LMWF94], is simply to rollback all activity desirable as well as undesirable to a point 10 believed to be free of damage. Such an approach may be used to recover from inadvertent as well as malicious damage. For example, users typically restore files with backup copies in the event of either a ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1994.

....computation is present throughout interactive systems modeled by UML, at the low implementation level, but the entire system cannot be expressed by such computation. Models of interactive computation are more recent; they include the Calculus of Concurrent Systems (CCS) Mi] input output automata [LMWF], and Sequential Interaction Machines [WG2, WG3] that maintain persistent state information between interaction steps. Figure 1. Algorithmic computation A software system modeled by UML is a computing entity. System components and objects are also computing entities: Computing entity: a finitely ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekrete, Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

....may have acted in good faith according to the policy of the system. Atomicity is not a new concern; it has been considered for years in the transaction processing environment. There are some excellent references on general techniques for achieve atomicity in electronic commerce protocols ([12, 11] are outstanding surveys of the field. This paper is a first attempt to enumerate some possible building blocks for generating atomic protocols in electronic commerce. Our concern with these topics is not purely academic. At CMU, we are currently building a system called NetBill. NetBill has a ....

....signatures of cryptographic checksums (such as MD5) of the data. This not only reduces storage costs at P, but it provides additional privacy against P reading the contents of the item sent from M to C. Finally, note that this protocol is only an example of the application of two phase commitment [11, 12] to the problem of electronic commerce. Two phase commitment is a well known technique for achieving atomicity. Case 3: Authority based atomicity 1. C M: price inquiry, TID 2. M C: price, TID 3. C M: instrument, TID 4. M P: instrument, item, TID 5. P M: status of payment, TID 6. P ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

N. Lynch, M. Merrit, W. Weihl, A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA 1994.

....environment has been presented to show its correctness but no implementation issues have been discussed. In one of the author s earlier work [12] linear hashing using nested transactions has been studied only with the aim of proving the correctness of the algorithm using I O automaton model [13]. In this paper, we first formalize the linear hash structures algorithm [8] in nested transaction environment using I O automaton model [13] Further, we present a system implementation of a nested transaction version of the linear hash structure algorithm using object oriented concepts and ....

.... work [12] linear hashing using nested transactions has been studied only with the aim of proving the correctness of the algorithm using I O automaton model [13] In this paper, we first formalize the linear hash structures algorithm [8] in nested transaction environment using I O automaton model [13]. Further, we present a system implementation of a nested transaction version of the linear hash structure algorithm using object oriented concepts and multithreading paradigm. In our formalization of algorithm using I O automaton model, we model buckets as automata (later modeled as objects) and ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Lynch, N., Merrit, M., Weihl, W., Fekete, A., Atomic Transactions, Morgan Kaufman Publishers, San Mateo, California, 1994.

....as necessary. Table 1 briefly explains the Z notation used in our examples. 2 Related Work Most transaction oriented models enforce a very low level, syntactic notion of consistency, namely serializability with respect to read write conflicts [BHG87] An expansion is the atomic transactions work [Her87, HW91, LMWF94, Lyn83, Wei84, Wei88], in which access operations are given by the particular abstract data type. We relax the requirement that transactions in correct executions histories appear atomic. Many researchers have broken transactions into steps and developed semantics based correctness criteria for decompositions ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, CA, 1994.

....from the original definitions, we do so explicitly and with motivation. If possible, we prove formally that the deviation is correct. Formal verification is not limited to algebraic verification of protocols. In principle, it can be used for any formalism [Cou93] for example I O automata [LMWF94, HSV94] and temporal logic [MP82, OL82, Hoo91] Earlier attempts to automatic verification of propositions of process theory are from Cleaveland and Panangaden [CP88] who gave an implementation of Milner s Calculus of Communicating Systems [Mil80] in the NuPrl system [CAB 86] and from ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1994.

....When the action is non atomic, refusal can only take place at start time; we do not allow a nonatomic action to abort after it has started. This severely limits the applicability of the technique and puts the entire, very relevant theory of transactions out of reach; see, e.g. Lynch et al. [19]. There is a number of open questions regarding the precise properties of s a refinement, such as: Can the reverse of Th. 1 be made to hold, maybe by a variation on # Is T 1 uniquely determined (up to #) by T 1 # T 2 Furthermore, in the introduction we already expressed our opinion ....

....of multi party synchronisation, and in [22] to define correctness of choice encodings. Last but not least, approaches similar to ours have been worked out in related research areas. While of necessity remaining very incomplete, we would like to mention again the work on atomic transactions in [19], as well as insights in atomicity to be gained from [5, 17, 16] ....

N. A. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. E. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, 1994.

....Specifically, a committed transaction may reflect inappropriate and or malicious activity. There are two common approaches to handling the problem of undesirable but committed transactions: rollback and compensation. The rollback approach, sometimes formalized in a nested transaction model [LMWF94], is simply to rollback all activity desirable as well as undesirable to a point believed to be free of damage. Such an approach may be used to recover from inadvertent as well as malicious damage. For example, users typically restore files with backup copies in the event of either a disk ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1994.

....Specifically, a committed transaction may reflect inappropriate and or malicious activity. There are two common approaches to handling the problem of undesirable but committed transactions: rollback and compensation. The rollback approach, sometimes formalized in a nested transaction model [15], is simply to rollback all activity desirable as well as undesirable to a point believed to be free of damage. Such an approach may be used to recover from inadvertent as well as malicious damage. For example, users typically restore files with backup copies in the event of either a disk ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1994.

....20 G 2 : u : u Gamma 20 G 3 : x : x 10; z : z 30 The result of Algorithm 1 is the history H s e = G 2 B fug 1 G 3 , thus G 3 need to be undone. Note that G 3 commutes backward through B fug 1 for any value of u yy , and so a final yy We adapt the notation of commutativity from [LMWF94, Wei88]. Transaction T2 commutes backward through transaction T1 if for any state s on which T1T2 is defined, T 2 (T1 (s) T1 (T2 (s) T 1 and T2 commute if each commutes backward through the other. Note that onesided commutativity (i.e. commutes backward through) is enough for our purpose. 6 state ....

....T 2 can precede a transaction T 1 for fix F if for any assignment of values to the variables in F and for any state s 0 2 S on which T F 1 T 2 is defined, 1. T 2 T F 1 is defined on s 0 , and 2. The same final state is produced by T F 1 T 2 and T 2 T F 1 . Similar to commutativity [LMWF94, Wei88], can precede relation can be detected by analyzing the semantics of transaction profiles (or codes) For example, in H 4 , G 3 can precede B fug 1 because the operations of G 3 and B 1 on data item x, respectively, commute no matter to which value u is assigned. For canned systems which are ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

....contain insertion and deletion requests for ground EDB tuples. This semantics is declarative and does not state anything about a particular evaluation model. In this paper we present an operational model that implements a fragment of the logical semantics in terms of open nested transactions [11, 9] performed on top of a loosely coupled database system (DBS) We implement the declarative logical semantics using (backtrackable) immediate updates. The structure of complex operations is reflected by trees of subtransactions during the evaluation. Some preliminaries for an operational model and ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

....contain insertion and deletion requests for ground EDB tuples. This semantics is declarative and does not state anything about a particular evaluation model. In this paper we present an operational model that implements a fragment of the logical semantics in terms of open nested transactions [LMWF94,Mos85] performed on top of a loosely coupled database system (DBS) The structure of complex operations is reflected by trees of subtransactions during the execution, and the semantics of hypothetical states is implemented using backtrackable immediate updates. This allows us to handle efficiently also ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

....limits the extent to which commutativity can be applied. We illustrate this point with an example, and then de ne a more restrictive notion of commutativity called can precede that takes xes into account. H 9 : s 0 T 1 s 1 T 2 s 2 T 3 s 3 k We adapt the notation of commutativity from [LMWF94, Wei88]. Transaction T2 commutes backward through transaction T1 if for any state s on which T1T2 is de ned, T2 (T1(s) T1(T2(s) T1 and T2 commute if each commutes backward through the other. Note that one sided commutativity (i.e. commutes backward through) is enough for our purpose. 16 T 1 : if ....

....(subtransaction) T from its compensation log records, where the action of T s compensating transaction is recorded. The can precede, cover, and invert relationships between transactions are based on the semantics of transactions, and they can be captured in a similar way to commutativity[LMWF94, Wei88, Kor83, SKPO88], and recoverability[BK92] In order to capture these relationships, the pro le (or code) and input arguments of each transaction must be available. In the Saga model, several possible solutions to the problem of saving code reliably are proposed[GMS87] therefore, these relationships can be ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

....the multi processing (and multi processor) systems that are common today. Whilst specialised parallel hardware, such as vector machines, has driven the need for specialised parallel programming techniques [Ski95] and database needs have driven the development of concurrent transactional systems [Dat95, Lyn94] most mainstream concurrent programming has occurred at the systems level and has employed simple synchronisation mechanisms that have been used, without much change, for decades. The advent of multi threading has allowed concurrent programming to seep into the applications domain, where the ....

....data, and all readers on that data. A reader excludes all writers (by symmetry) but does not exclude other readers. Note that reader 5 There are many ways in which this information can be expressed, such as the paired listings of conflict sets [Lea96 Section 5.1. 4] or the use of conflict tables [Lyn94] but we prefer the graphical form of the exclusion matrix. Put Get Count Put XXX Get XXX Count XX 92 and writer are logical terms: whilst writers will usually modify something they are not required to, as the execution of two writers concurrently could be logically, rather than ....

Lynch N., Merritt M., Weihl W. and Fekete A., "Atomic Transactions" Morgan Kaufmann Publishing, ISBN 1-55860-104-X, 1994

....the multi processing (and multi processor) systems that are common today. Whilst specialised parallel hardware, such as vector machines, has driven the need for specialised parallel programming techniques [Ski95] and database needs have driven the development of concurrent transactional systems [Dat95, Lyn94] most mainstream concurrent programming has occurred at the systems level and has employed simple synchronisation mechanisms that have been used, without much change, for decades. The advent of multi threading has allowed concurrent programming to seep into the applications domain, where the ....

Lynch N., Merritt M., Weihl W. and Fekete A., "Atomic Transactions" Morgan Kaufmann Publishing, ISBN 1-55860-104-X, 1994

....of two existing replication control protocols in terms of transaction processing efficiency. Key Words: Distributed objects, Transaction processing, Replication; Fault tolerance. Performance evaluation. 1 Introduction Many operations in a replicated object system are organised as transactions [1]. In classical research literature, transactions are characterised to have the properties of atomicity, consistency, isolation, and durability (ACID) The twophase commit (2PC) protocol is the most widely used protocol in commercial databases to maintain the ACID properties of transactions. Such ....

N. Lynch, M. Morritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., 1994.

....the Timestamp Ordering protocol. We have defined a systematic way to extend these protocols with new actions and control information such that serializability is preserved. Failures are assumed not to occur and only actions of successful transactions are considered. Atomicity and durability. In [LMWF94] a very general formal definition of atomicity for abstract datatypes is given. A number of recovery algorithms for abstract datatypes and nested transactions has been modelled and verified in an I O automata framework. In [Kuo96] a data manager responsible for single site recovery has been ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., 1994.

....of logging changes like B tree splits while introducing only minor changes to cache management. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first treatment of crash recovery that is both formal and general. Formal treatments of recovery from aborts via transaction rollback are quite general [13], but the only formal treatment of recovery from crashes we know about [8] is specific to ARIES [14] In the remainder of this introduction, we explain in more detail how the choice of logged operations can affect recovery, and how our framework exposes this impact. 1.1 The basics of redo ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufman, 1993.

.... errors caused by software design faults may not be repeated at the new execution [Randell 1975] and atomic transactions (in which a sequence of changes on a set of data items are undone together) which allow the designer to manage together error recovery and concurrency control in accessing data [Lynch, Merrit et al. 1993]. Conversations and atomic transactions are in fact dual models of recovery, as discussed in [Shrivastava, Mancini et al. 1993] they are two ways of describing the same backward recovery philosophy in the two models (or design styles) which the authors of [Shrivastava, Mancini et al. 1993] call ....

....one. Researchers have suggested various ways of organising the use of backward recovery so as to avoid inconsistency, simplify the task of application programmers and limit the domino effect. Among these techniques we can quote planned conversations, Randell 1975] and atomic transactions [Lynch, Merrit et al. 1993], which, together, are the topic of this paper and will be detailed in the next two subsections. A third possibility is given by programmer transparent schemes, where the application programmer may be given the illusion of a completely reliable underlying machine. These last include [Barigazzi and ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

N.A. Lynch, M. Merrit, W.E. Wehil and A. Fekete. Atomic transactions, Morgan Kaufmann, 1993.

....leading to alternate designs. Selection among alternates, necessitates evaluation. In order to make an evaluation, it is necessary to capture the system requirements specifications and the alternate designs in a single formal framework. In this paper, we propose to extend the basic I O automaton [7] model to capture the fault tolerant properties of mission critical systems. In section 2, we give an overview of I O automaton model. Section 3 motivates the need for extensions to I O automata and presents an extended I O automaton model. Section 4 shows how the concepts of fault tolerance can ....

....the usefulness of the proposed framework for capturing fault tolerance aspects in mission critical systems. Section 6 concludes with directions for future work. 2 I O Automata I O automata provide an appropriate model for discrete event systems consisting of concurrentlyoperating components [7]. These systems, instead of simply computing some function on their input and halting, continuously receive input from and react to their environment. Each system component is modeled as an automaton, a mathematical object with states and named transitions between them [7] The actions of an ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

N. A. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufman, 1994.

....components [21] These systems, instead of simply computing some function on their input and halting, continuously receive input from and react to their environment. Each system component is modeled as an automaton, a mathematical object with states and named transitions between them [20]. The actions of an automaton are classified as either input, output or internal. In an I O automaton the internal and output actions are generated autonomously, and the output actions are transmitted instantaneously to its environment. The input actions of an automaton are generated by the ....

....behaviour. One way to specify properties of an automaton s behaviour is in terms of another automaton. That is one can define a specification automaton B, and say that any automaton A is correct if it implements B, in the sense that every finite behaviour of A, is also a finite behaviour of B [20]. This model permits description of the same system at different levels of abstraction. This powerful abstraction facility in I O automata led to its use in investigation of various facets of distributed systems like atomic transactions [20] network resource allocation, communication and shared ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

N. A. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufman, 1994.

....to roll back the processors to a state consistent with the transaction have never been begun in the rst place. Atomic transactions form the cornerstone of modern transaction processing theory. Nancy Lynch and her fellow researchers have written an encyclopedic book about atomic transactions [13]; a tremendous resource for those implementing atomic transaction processing systems is the standard textbook [9] for a thorough review of powerful roll back methods in the context of computer security and electronic commerce, see [25] 26] and [27] The A in ACID Transactions stands for ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1994.

....means to guarantee multi object consistency [21] Transaction concepts define consistency more or less independent from application semantics. In most cases correctness is based on serializability or some extension of it. Therefore, all objects must obey a globally defined synchronization scheme [35]. Consequently, transaction concepts limit object autonomy and impose a fixed protocol that cannot be adapted to task specific constraints on temporal orderings of messages in the context of an activity. These constraints remain hidden in the implementation of the participating objects. There is a ....

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

....in all workspaces in which it occurs. 3.2 Merging rules The merging rules are needed to allow for a semantically correct exchange of activity instances among workspaces. The merging rules consist of the backward commutativity relation (bc) and the forward commutativity relation (fc) Wei88, LMWF94] defined over activity instances. The specification of the relations bc and fc provides for each pair of activity types a predicate involving the parameters of their signatures. By applying the specified predicates to the respective activity instances, the membership in the bc or fc relation, ....

N. Lynch, M. Merrit, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., 1994.

....same is true for the composition of the pseudotime controller and pseudotime 900 M. HERLIHY et al. objects of [2] We present these examples in more detail later in this paper. In fact, we claim that almost all interesting transaction processing algorithms can be modeled as basic databases. See [14] for additional examples. Our notion of basic database identifies the aspects of transaction processing algorithms that are relevant to our analysis of orphan management algorithms. It turns out that the details of how synchronization and recovery are imple mented by a basic database are ....

....failures. The serial objects serve as a specification of how objects should behave in the absence of concurrency and failures. The serial objects serve the same purpose as the serial specifications [25] and [26] A detailed description of serial systems may be found in the references [4] and [12 14]. Now we give a definition that says that a sequence of actions looks like a serial behavior to a particular transaction. Namely, if 3 is a sequence of actions and T is a transaction name, we say that 3 is serially correct for T if there exists a serial behavior y such that y IT = 3 IT. In ....

LYNCH, N., MERRITT, M., WEIHL, W., AND FEKETE, A. Atomic Transactions. MorganKaufmann, San Mateo, Calif. To appear, Fall 1992.

....Finally, we conclude with a discussion and some suggestions for further work. In an Appendix, we briefly summarize the earlier work of ours that provides the framework for this paper. Because of length constraints, this paper omits all the proofs of our results. The proofs will appear in [6]. 2 Hybrid Atomicity This section depends on our earlier work, presented as Sections 3 to 5 of [5] and summarized in the Appendix. The development in this section closely parallels that in Section 6 of [5] and also that in [2] In our presentation we concentrate on those aspects that are ....

A. Fekete, N. Lynch, M. Merritt, and W. Weihl. Atomic Transactions. Morgan- Kaufmann, 1992.

....atomic. Finally, we conclude with a discussion and some suggestions for further work. In an Appendix, we briefly summarize the earlier work of ours that provides the framework for this paper. Because of length constraints, this paper omits all the proofs of our results. The proofs will appear in [6]. 2 Hybrid Atomicity This section depends on our earlier work, presented as Sections 3 to 5 of [5] and summarized in the Appendix. The development in this section closely parallels that in Section 6 of [5] and also that in [2] In our presentation we concentrate on those aspects that are ....

A. Fekete, N. Lynch, M. Merritt, and W. Weihl. Atomic Transactions. Morgan- Kaufmann, 1992.

....been extended to a timed I O automaton model [LV96] which allows modeling of timing aspects of distributed systems, including timing assumptions and performance guarantees. Both I O automata and timed I O automata can be described using simple guarded command style pseudocode (see, for example, LMWF94, Lyn96] Although I O automata were originally developed for modeling theoretical distributed algorithms, in the past few years they have been used to model practical system components such as distributed shared memory services (for example, FKL98, FGL 99] group communication services ....

....explicit representations of the parts of an automaton de nition (actions, states, transitions, and so on) Transitions are described using transition de nitions (TDs) containing preconditions and e ects. This pseudocode has evolved in two di erent forms: a declarative style (see, for example, LMWF94] in which e ects are described by predicates relating pre and poststates, and an imperative style (for example, Lyn96] in which e ects are described by simple imperative programs. In moving from pseudocode to a formally de ned programming language, we made the following design decisions: ....

Lynch, N., Merritt, M., Weihl, W., and Fekete, A. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, CA, 1994.

....has been extended to a timed I O automaton model [LV96] which allows modeling of timing aspects of distributed systems, including timing assumptions and performance guarantees. Both I O automata and timed I O automata can be described using simple guarded command style pseudocode (see, e.g. LMWF94, Lyn96] Although I O automata were originally developed for modeling theoretical distributed algorithms, in the past few years they have been used to model practical system components such as distributed shared memory services (e.g. FKL98, FGL 99] group communication services [FLS97, ....

....contains explicit representations of the parts of an automaton definition (actions, states, transitions, etc. Transitions are described using transition definitions (TDs) containing preconditions and effects. This pseudocode has evolved in two different forms: a declarative style (see, e.g. LMWF94] in which effects are described by predicates relating pre and post states, and an imperative style (e.g. Lyn96] in which effects are described by simple imperative programs. In moving from pseudocode to a formally defined programming language, we made the following design decisions: ....

Lynch, N., Merritt, M., Weihl, W., and Fekete, A. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, CA, 1994.

No context found.

N. Lynch, M. Merri , W. Weihl and A. Feke e. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1994.

No context found.

LYNCH, N., MERRITT, M., WEIHL, W., AND FEKETE, A. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

No context found.

N. Lynch, M. Merrit, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

No context found.

N. Lynch, M. Merritt, W. Weihl, A. Fekete, Atomic Transactions, Morgan-Kaufman, 1994.

No context found.

Nancy Lynch et al. Atomic Transactions. MIT Press, 1994.

No context found.

Lynch, N., Merritt, M., Weihl, W., and Fekete, A. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1994.

No context found.

Lynch, N. A., Merritt, M., Weihl, W., and Fekete, A. (1994) Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA.

No context found.

Lynch, N. A., Merritt, M., Weihl, W. and Fekete, A. (1994) Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA.

No context found.

N. Lynch, M. Merrit, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

No context found.

W. Weihl N. Lynch, M. Merritt and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, CA, 1994.

No context found.

N. Lynch, M. Merrit, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. MorganKaufmann, 1994.

No context found.

N. Lynch, M. Merrit, W. Weihl, and A. Fekete. Atomic Transactions. MorganKaufmann, 1994.

First 50 documents  Next 50

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC