This Article 
 Bibliographic References 
 Add to: 
Effective Scheduling of Detached Rules in Active Databases
January/February 2003 (vol. 15 no. 1)
pp. 2-13

Abstract—While triggers have become a classical ingredient of relational database systems, research in active databases is aiming at extending the functionality and expressive power of active rules beyond the scope of relational triggers. One of the most important current trend concerns the support of detached active rules, i.e., of rules which are executed as separate transactions, running outside of the scope of the transaction which generates the triggering event. Detached rules have important applications in workflow management and global integrity maintenance across transactions. One of the main issues in designing the rule engine for detached rules is determining their optimal scheduling. In this paper, we study the performance of a detached rule scheduler whose objective is to minimize the interference of detached rule execution with regard to the normal transactional load. This objective is achieved by executing detached rules at given periods of time and by assigning them a fixed amount of dedicated threads; we study the performance of the scheduler relative to the two most critical design parameters, the frequency of execution of the scheduler, and the number of dedicated execution threads.

[1] B. Adelberg, H. Garcia-Molina, and J. Widom, “The Strip Rule System for Efficiently Maintaining Derived Data,” Proc. ACM SIGMOD Int'l Conf. Management of Data, pp. 147-158, June 1997.
[2] B. Adelberg, B. Kao, and H. Garcia-Molina, “Database Support for Efficiently Maintaining Derived Data,” Proc. Fifth Int'l Conf. Extending Database Technology (EDBT '96), pp. 223-240, Mar. 1996.
[3] E. Baralis and A. Bianco, “Performance Evaluation of Rule Semantics in Active Databases,” Proc. 13th Int'l Conf. Data Eng. (ICDE '97), pp. 365-374, Apr. 1997.
[4] M.J. Carey, R. Jauhari, and M. Livny, “On Transaction Boundaries in Active Databases: A Performance Perspective,” IEEE Trans. Knowledge and Data Eng., vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 320-336, Sept. 1991.
[5] F. Casati, S. Ceri, S. Paraboschi, and G. Pozzi, “Specification and Implementation of Exceptions in Workflow Management Systems,” ACM Trans. Database Systems, pp. 405-451, Sept. 1999.
[6] F. Casati, S. Ceri, B. Pernici, and G. Pozzi, “Deriving Active Rules for Workflow Enactment,” Proc. Seventh Int'l Conf. Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA '96), pp. 94-115, Sept. 1996.
[7] S. Chakravarthy, “SENTINEL: An Object-Oriented DBMS with Event-Based Rules,” Proc. ACM SIGMOD Int'l Conf. Management of Data, pp. 572-575, June 1997.
[8] U. Dayal, A. Buchmann, and S. Chakravarthy, “The HiPAC Project,” Active Database Systems, pp. 177-206, San Mateo, Calif.: Morgan Kaufman, Aug. 1996.
[9] P. Fraternali and S. Paraboschi, “Chimera: A Language for Designing Rule Applications,” Active Rules in Database Systems, pp. 309-322, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1999.
[10] S. Gatziu and K.R. Dittrich, “SAMOS,” Active Rules in Database Systems, pp. 233-247, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1999.
[11] S. Gatziu, H. Fritschi, and A. Vaduva, “SAMOS, An Active Object-Oriented Database System: Manual,” Technical Report 96.02, Dept. Computer Science, Univ. of Zurich, 1996.
[12] N. Gehani and H. Jagadish, “Active Database Facilities in ODE,” Active Database Systems, San Mateo, Calif.: Morgan Kaufman, Aug. 1996.
[13] A. Geppert and D. Tombros, “Event-Based Distributed Workflow Execution with EVE,” Technical Report 96.05, Dept. Computer Science, Univ. of Zurich, May 1995.
[14] J. Gray and A. Reuter, Transaction Processing: Concepts and Techniques, Morgan Kauffman, 1993.
[15] P. Grefen, B. Pernici, and G. Sánchez, Database Support for Workflow Management: The WIDE Project. Norwell, Mass.: Kluwer Academic, 1999.
[16] G. Kappel, P. Lang, S. Rausch-Schott, and W. Retschitzegger, “Workflow Management Based on Objects, Rules, and Roles,” IEEE Data Eng., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 11-18, Mar. 1995.
[17] G. Kappel and W. Retschitzegger, “The TriGS Active Object-Oriented Database System—An Overview,” ACM Sigmod Record, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 36-41, Sept. 1998.
[18] L. Kleinrock, Queueing Systems. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1975.
[19] A. Kotz Dittrich and E. Simon, “Active Database Systems: Expectations, Commercial Experience, and Beyond,” Active Rules in Database Systems, pp. 367-404, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1999.
[20] E.D. Lazowska, J. Zahorjan, G.S. Graham, and K.C. Sevcik, Quantitative System Performance, Prentice Hall, pp 64-66, 1984.
[21] J.D.C. Little, “A Proof of the Queueing Formula$\big. L=\lambda W\bigr.$,” Operations Research, vol. 9, pp. 383-387, 1961.
[22] D.A. Menascé, V.A.F. Almeida, and L.W. Dowdy, Capacity Planning and Performance Modeling: From Mainframes to Client-Server Systems.Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1994.
[23] N. Paton, Active Rules in Database Systems. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1999.
[24] R. Sivasankaran, J. Stankovic, D. Towsley, B. Purimetla, and K. Ramamritham, “Priority Assignment in Real-Time Active Databases,” The VLDB J., vol. 5, 1996.
[25] J. Widom and S. Ceri, Active Database Systems. San Mateo, Calif.: Morgan Kaufmann, Aug. 1996.
[26] J. Zimmermann and A. Buchmann, “REACH,” Active Rules in Database Systems, pp. 263-277, Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1999.

Index Terms:
Active databases, detached rules, rule scheduling.
Stefant Ceri, Claudio Gennaro, Stefano Paraboschi, Giuseppe Serazzi, "Effective Scheduling of Detached Rules in Active Databases," IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 2-13, Jan.-Feb. 2003, doi:10.1109/TKDE.2003.1161578
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.