This Article 
 Bibliographic References 
 Add to: 
The Performance of Flow Graph Locking
April 1990 (vol. 16 no. 4)
pp. 477-483

The performance of flow graph locking (FGL) is compared with that of two-phase locking (2PL). As the data sharing level increases, FGL has a better response time than 2PL. Regardless of the data sharing or multiprogramming levels, FGL usually facilitates a better throughput rate than 2PL.

[1] D. Bitton, D. J. DeWitt, and C. Turbyfill, "Benchmarking database systems--A systematic approach," inProc. 1983 Very Large Data-base conf., Oct. 1983.
[2] H. Boral and D. DeWitt, "A methodology for database system performance evaluation," inProc. SIGMOD--Conf. Management of Data, Boston, MA, June 1984.
[3] A. L. Davis and R. M. Keller, "Data flow program graphs,"Computer, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 26-42, Feb. 1982.
[4] M. H. Eich, "Graph directed locking,"IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 133-140, Feb. 1988.
[5] M. H. Eich and D. L. Wells, "Database concurrency control using data flow graphs,"ACM Trans. Database Syst., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 197-227, June 1988.
[6] K. P. Eswaran, J. N. Gray, R. A. Lorie, and I. L. Traiger, "The notions of consistency and predicate locks in a database system,"Commun. ACM, vol. 19, no. 11, pp. 624-633, Nov. 1976.
[7] S. M. Garard, "Implementation of flow graph locking as a concurrency control mechanism in INGRES," M.S. thesis, Dep. Comput. Sci. Eng., Southern Methodist Univ., May 1988.

Index Terms:
performance; flow graph locking; two-phase locking; response time; data sharing; multiprogramming levels; concurrency control; distributed databases.
M.H. Eich, S.M. Garard, "The Performance of Flow Graph Locking," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 477-483, April 1990, doi:10.1109/32.54301
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.