This Article 
   
 Share 
   
 Bibliographic References 
   
 Add to: 
 
Digg
Furl
Spurl
Blink
Simpy
Google
Del.icio.us
Y!MyWeb
 
 Search 
   
Distributed Concurrency Control Based on Limited Wait-Depth
November 1993 (vol. 4 no. 11)
pp. 1246-1264

The performance of high-volume transaction processing systems for business applications is determined by the degree of contention for hardware resources as well as for data. Hardware resource requirements may be met cost-effectively with a data-partitioned or shared-nothing architecture. However, the two-phase locking (2PL) concurrency control method may restrict the performance of a shared-nothing system more severely than that of a centralized system due to increased lock holding times. Deadlock detection and resolution are an added complicating factor in shared-nothing systems. The authors describe distributed Wait-Depth Limited (WDL) concurrency control (CC), a locking-based distributed CC method that limits the wait-depth of blocked transactions to one, thus preventing the occurrence of deadlocks. Several implementations of distributed WDL which vary in the number of messages and the amount of information available for decision making are discussed. The performance of a generic implementation of distributed WDL is compared with distributed 2PL (with general-waiting policy) and the Wound-Wait CC method through a detailed simulation. It is shown that distributed WDL behaves similarly to 2PL for low lock contention levels, but for substantial lock contention levels (caused by higher degrees of transaction concurrency), distributed WDL outperforms the other methods to a significant degree.

[1] R. Agrawal, M. J. Carey, and M. Linvy, "Concurrency control performance modelling: Alternatives and implications,"ACM Trans. Database Syst., vol. 12, pp. 609-654, Dec. 1987.
[2] P.A. Bernstein, V. Hadzilacos, and N. Goodman,Concurrency Control and Recovery in Database Systems, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1987.
[3] M. J. Carey and M. Livny, "Distributed concurrency control performance: A study of algorithms, distribution, and replication," inProc. 14th Int. Conf. Very Large Data Bases, 1988.
[4] P. Franaszek and J. T. Robinson, "Limitations on concurrency in transaction processing,"ACM Trans. Database Systems, vol. 10, Mar. 1985.
[5] P. Franaszek, J. T. Robinson, and A. Thomasian, "Access invariance and its use in high contention environments," inProc. 6th Int. Conf. Data Eng., Los Angeles, CA, Feb. 1990, pp. 47-55.
[6] P. A. Franazsek, J. T. Robinson, and A. Thomasian, "Wait depth limited concurrency control," inProc. 7th IEEE Conf. Data Eng., Kobe, Japan, Apr. 1991, pp. 92-101.
[7] P. A. Franazsek, J. T. Robinson, and A. Thomasian, "Concurrency control for high contention environments,"ACM Trans. Database Syst., vol. 17, pp. 304-345, June 1992.
[8] P. Heidelberger and M. S. Lakshmi, "A performance comparison of multimicro and mainframe database architectures,"IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 14, pp. 522-531, Apr. 1988.
[9] J. Gray, "The cost of messages," inProc. Seventh Annu. Symp. Principles Distributed Comput., Toronto, Ont., Canada, Aug. 1988, pp. 1-7.
[10] T. Hearder, "Observations on optimistic concurrency control schemes,"Inform. Syst., vol. 9, pp. 111-120, 1984.
[11] B. C. Jenq, B. C. Twitchell, and T. W. Keller, "Locking performance in a shared nothing parallel database machine,"IEEE Trans. Knowledge Data Eng., vol. 1, pp. 530-543, Dec. 1989.
[12] M. Livny,DeNet User's Guide, Version 1.0, Dep. Comput. Sci., Univ. Wisconsin, Madison, 1988.
[13] C. Mohan, "Less optimism about optimistic concurrency control," inProc. 2nd Int. Workshop Res. Issues in Data Eng., Tempe, AZ, Feb. 1992, pp. 199-204.
[14] D.J. Rosenkrantz, R.E. Stearns, and P.M. Lewis, II, "System level concurrency control for distributed database systems,"ACM Trans. Database Syst., vol. 3, pp. 178-198, June 1978.
[15] K. C. Sevcik, "Comparison of concurrency control methods using analytic models," inInformation Processing 83: Proc. 9th IFIP World Congr., R. E. A. Mason, Ed., Paris, France, Sept. 1983, pp. 847-858.
[16] M. Stonebraker, "The case for shared nothing,"Database Eng. Bull., vol. 9, pp. 4-9, Mar. 1986.
[17] Y.C. Tay, N. Goodman, and R. Suri, "Locking performance in centralized databases,"ACM Trans. Database Syst., vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 415-462, Dec. 1985.
[18] A. Thomasian and E. Rahm, "A new distributed optimistic concurrency control method and a comparison of its performance with two-phase locking," inProc. Tenth Int. Conf. Distributed Comput. Syst., Paris, France, May 1990, pp. 294-301.
[19] A. Thomasian, "Performance limits of 2PL concurrency control," inProc. 7th IEEE Int. Conf. Data Eng., Kobe, Japan, Apr. 1991.
[20] A. Thomasian and I. K. Ryu, "Performance analysis of two-phase locking,"IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 17, May 1991.
[21] A. Thomasian, "Performance analysis of locking policies with limited wait-depth," inProc. ACM SIGMETRICS/Performance '92 Conf., Newport, RI, June 1992, pp. 115-127.
[22] A. Thomasian, "On the number of remote sites accessed in distributed transaction processing,"IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst., to be published. Also, IBM Res. Rep. RC 15430, Hawthorne, NY, Jan. 1990.

Index Terms:
Index Termsconcurrency control; transaction processing; two-phase locking; distributed; Wait-DepthLimited; deadlocks; Wound-Wait CC; distributed 2PL; limited wait-depth; distributedalgorithms; distributed databases; performance evaluation; concurrency control;database theory; distributed algorithms; distributed databases; performance evaluation;transaction processing
Citation:
P.A. Franaszek, J.R. Haritsa, J.T. Robinson, A. Thomasian, "Distributed Concurrency Control Based on Limited Wait-Depth," IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 4, no. 11, pp. 1246-1264, Nov. 1993, doi:10.1109/71.250103
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.