Multi-version Speculative Concurrency Control with Delayed Commit

This paper presents an algorithm which extends the relatively new notion of speculative concurrency control by delaying the commitment of transactions, thus allowing other conflicting transactions to continue execution and commit rather than restart. This algorithm propagates uncommitted data to other outstanding transactions thus allowing more speculative schedules to be considered. The algorithm is shown always to find a serializable schedule, and to avoid cascading aborts. Like speculative concurrency control, it considers strictly more schedules than traditional concurrency control algorithms. Further work is needed to determine which of these speculative methods performs better on actual transaction loads.

Using Warp to Control Network Contention in Mermera

Parallel computing on a network of workstations can saturate the communication network, leading to excessive message delays and consequently poor application performance. We examine empirically the consequences of integrating a flow control protocol, called Warp control [Par93], into Mermera, a software shared memory system that supports parallel computing on distributed systems [HS93]. For an asynchronous iterative program that solves a system of linear equations, our measurements show that Warp succeeds in stabilizing the network's behavior even under high levels of contention. As a result, the application achieves a higher effective communication throughput, and a reduced completion time. In some cases, however, Warp control does not achieve the performance attainable by fixed size buffering when using a statically optimal buffer size. Our use of Warp to regulate the allocation of network bandwidth emphasizes the possibility for integrating it with the allocation of other resources, such as CPU cycles and disk bandwidth, so as to optimize overall system throughput, and enable fully-shared execution of parallel programs.

An Admission Control Paradigm for Real-time Databases

We propose and evaluate an admission control paradigm for RTDBS, in which a transaction is submitted to the system as a pair of processes: a primary task, and a recovery block. The execution requirements of the primary task are not known a priori, whereas those of the recovery block are known a priori. Upon the submission of a transaction, an Admission Control Mechanism is employed to decide whether to admit or reject that transaction. Once admitted, a transaction is guaranteed to finish executing before its deadline. A transaction is considered to have finished executing if exactly one of two things occur: Either its primary task is completed (successful commitment), or its recovery block is completed (safe termination). Committed transactions bring a profit to the system, whereas a terminated transaction brings no profit. The goal of the admission control and scheduling protocols (e.g., concurrency control, I/O scheduling, memory management) employed in the system is to maximize system profit. We describe a number of admission control strategies and contrast (through simulations) their relative performance.

Concurrency Admission Control Management in ACCORD

We propose and evaluate admission control mechanisms for ACCORD, an Admission Control and Capacity Overload management Real-time Database framework-an architecture and a transaction model-for hard deadline RTDB systems. The system architecture consists of admission control and scheduling components which provide early notification of failure to submitted transactions that are deemed not valuable or incapable of completing on time. In particular, our Concurrency Admission Control Manager (CACM) ensures that transactions which are admitted do not overburden the system by requiring a level of concurrency that is not sustainable. The transaction model consists of two components: a primary task and a compensating task. The execution requirements of the primary task are not known a priori, whereas those of the compensating task are known a priori. Upon the submission of a transaction, the Admission Control Mechanisms are employed to decide whether to admit or reject that transaction. Once admitted, a transaction is guaranteed to finish executing before its deadline. A transaction is considered to have finished executing if exactly one of two things occur: Either its primary task is completed (successful commitment), or its compensating task is completed (safe termination). Committed transactions bring a profit to the system, whereas a terminated transaction brings no profit. The goal of the admission control and scheduling protocols (e.g., concurrency control, I/O scheduling, memory management) employed in the system is to maximize system profit. In that respect, we describe a number of concurrency admission control strategies and contrast (through simulations) their relative performance.