Performance Evaluation of Two-Shadow Speculative Concurrency Control

Speculative Concurrency Control (SCC) [Best92a] is a new concurrency control approach especially suited for real-time database applications. It relies on the use of redundancy to ensure that serializable schedules are discovered and adopted as early as possible, thus increasing the likelihood of the timely commitment of transactions with strict timing constraints. In [Best92b], SCC-nS, a generic algorithm that characterizes a family of SCC-based algorithms was described, and its correctness established by showing that it only admits serializable histories. In this paper, we evaluate the performance of the Two-Shadow SCC algorithm (SCC-2S), a member of the SCC-nS family, which is notable for its minimal use of redundancy. In particular, we show that SCC-2S (as a representative of SCC-based algorithms) provides significant performance gains over the widely used Optimistic Concurrency Control with Broadcast Commit (OCC-BC), under a variety of operating conditions and workloads.

Deterministic Computations Whose History Is Independent of the Order of Asynchronous Updating

Consider a network of processors (sites) in which each site x has a finite set N(x) of neighbors. There is a transition function f that for each site x computes the next state ξ(x) from the states in N(x). But these transitions (updates) are applied in arbitrary order, one or many at a time. If the state of site x at time t is η(x; t) then let us define the sequence ζ(x; 0); ζ(x; 1), ... by taking the sequence η(x; 0),η(x; 1), ... , and deleting each repetition, i.e. each element equal to the preceding one. The function f is said to have invariant histories if the sequence ζ(x; i), (while it lasts, in case it is finite) depends only on the initial configuration, not on the order of updates. This paper shows that though the invariant history property is typically undecidable, there is a useful simple sufficient condition, called commutativity: For any configuration, for any pair x; y of neighbors, if the updating would change both ξ(x) and ξ(y) then the result of updating first x and then y is the same as the result of doing this in the reverse order. This fact is derivable from known results on the confluence of term-rewriting systems but the self-contained proof given here may be justifiable.