E. Best and B. Randell, `A formal model of atomicity in asynchronous systems', Acta Informatica, 16, 93--124 (1981).  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....in terms of quotients. 4.3. 1 Coarsenings in Causal Nets There exist several approaches to Petri net abstractions and renements in the literature; cf the morphism approaches in Merceron [Mer94] Desel and Merceron [DM96] Valk [Ge98] or in the calculus of Petri Boxes ( BDE93] Best and Randell [BR81] present a notion of atomic occurrence. Since their underlying process model is (essentially) CNs, their atomic subnets correspond to the oblong sets we will introduce below; we will show that and how, in the common relational framework, the results carry over to l.s. synchronization graphs and ....

E. Best and B. Randell. A Formal Model of Atomicity in Asynchronous Systems. Acta Informatica, 16:93124, 1981.

....action a 2 l(E P ) let ref (a) be deadlock free. Then ref (P) is deadlock free. The second property we want to look at is atomicity. We will define atomicity by noninterference. We will not require that no other actions may overlap with the execution of the set of atomic actions as in [3] In [2] interference is described as follows: We define an event e to interfere with an activity A if it occurs strictly after part of A and strictly before another part of A. An activity in our setting is a set of events. Definition 6.1 (interference freeness) Let u be an F dag. An event e is said ....

Eike Best and B. Randell. A formal model of atomicity in asynchronous systems. Acta Informatica, 16:93--124, 1981.

....special care is necessary when timestamping these abstract events. 7.1 Definition The concept of a contraction has been defined in a number of papers, using different notations and slightly different semantics. The last definition comes from Summers[27] based upon work done by Best and Randell[5] and Cheung[7] He adds an additional requirement to correct a potential violation of the relation possible with the previous definitions. The following paragraphs repeat the definitions in Summers[27] for the sake of completeness. Definition 21 (Input point) An input point I A n of a set of ....

Eike Best and Brian Randell. A Formal Model of Atomicity in Asynchronous Systems. Acta Informatica, 16:93--124, 1981.

....than that discussed in [6] It is the recoverability of the server. We say that the server is recoverable if in the interface it has three procedures entries ENTER, COMMIT, ABORT (they correspond to the two entries discussed) which provide the participation of the server in an atomic action [4]. The server is involved in it by call ENTER; its result can be aborted by call ABORT or committed (COMMIT) If ABORT is called, then all modification done during the atomic action is flushed. Note a very important peculiarity: unlike [6] we do not require that the server should be returned to ....

A. Best and B. Randell, A formal model of atomicity in asynchronous systems, Acta Inform. 16 (1981) 93-124.

.... atomic is over used in the programming community and one has to carefully distinguish among the different meanings it takes in different contexts. In a multiprocessing context, it is used to qualify the interference free or serializable execution of parallel operations [Bernstein87] Best81b] In a context in which program interpreter crashes can occur, a command C is said to be atomic with respect to crashes if a crash occurrence during the execution of C either causes no stable state transition or causes the stable state transition specified for C [Cristian85] Clearly atomicity ....

E. Best and B. Randell, "A formal model of atomicity in Asynchronous Systems", in Acta Informatica, Vol. 16, pp. 93-124, 1981.

....[19] have all input events preceding all output events. This also guarantees transitivity, and an appropriate timestamp is the element wise minimum of the timestamps of the output events. Contractions are the most general structure that has the same partial order structure as primitive events [6, 9]. They have the property that there is a path inside the contraction for each pair of preceding and succeeding events outside it. Unfortunately, the definition of a contraction and the rules for interconnection of such abstract events are both restrictive and complicated. In addition, timestamping ....

E. Best and B. Randell. A formal model of atomicity in asynchronous systems. Acta Informatica, 16:93--124, 1981.

No context found.

E. Best and B. Randell, `A formal model of atomicity in asynchronous systems', Acta Informatica, 16, 93--124 (1981).

....of the system s dynamic structure. The concept of an atomic action can be used to structure such interactions. An atomic action is an activity between a group of components with the property that no interactions occur between that group and the rest of the system for the duration of the activity [4][19] 21] If a group of components are asynchronous (i.e. concurrently active) and interacting, atomic actions are useful in imposing constraints on the flow of information within the system. A conversation and a transaction are in fact two concrete instances of the notion of an atomic action. In ....

....facilities of actual programming languages [12] None of these proposals is based on an OO language model or could be used in a concurrent OO system. The notion of an atomic action was originally introduced in the context of database systems, it was then explored as a method of process structuring [4][21] In [5] the conversation scheme was extended to form a general framework for fault tolerance in concurrent process systems that allows the construction of systems employing both forward and backward error recovery supported by nested atomic actions. The work in [15] provided a syntax for ....

E. Best and B. Randell, "A Formal Model of Atomicity in Asynchronous Systems," Acta Informatica, vol. 16, pp.93-124, 1981.

No context found.

Eike Best and Brian Randell. A formal model of atomicity in asynchronous systems. Acta Informatica, 16:93-- 124, 1981.

No context found.

E. Best and B. Randell. A formal model of atomicity in asynchronous systems. Acta Informatica, 16:93--124.

No context found.

Best and Randell 81 Best, E. and Randell, B. "A Formal Model of Atomicity in Asynchronous Systems," Acta Informatica, Vol. 16, pp. 93--124, 1981.

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