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.

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.

Speculative Concurrency Control for Real-Time Databases

In this paper, we propose a new class of Concurrency Control Algorithms that is especially suited for real-time database applications. Our approach relies on the use of (potentially) redundant computations to ensure that serializable schedules are found and executed as early as possible, thus, increasing the chances of a timely commitment of transactions with strict timing constraints. Due to its nature, we term our concurrency control algorithms Speculative. The aforementioned description encompasses many algorithms that we call collectively Speculative Concurrency Control (SCC) algorithms. SCC algorithms combine the advantages of both Pessimistic and Optimistic Concurrency Control (PCC and OCC) algorithms, while avoiding their disadvantages. On the one hand, SCC resembles PCC in that conflicts are detected as early as possible, thus making alternative schedules available in a timely fashion in case they are needed. On the other hand, SCC resembles OCC in that it allows conflicting transactions to proceed concurrently, thus avoiding unnecessary delays that may jeopardize their timely commitment.

Value-cognizant Speculative Concurrency Control

A problem with Speculative Concurrency Control algorithms and other common concurrency control schemes using forward validation is that committing a transaction as soon as it finishes validating, may result in a value loss to the system. Haritsa showed that by making a lower priority transaction wait after it is validated, the number of transactions meeting their deadlines is increased, which may result in a higher value-added to the system. SCC-based protocols can benefit from the introduction of such delays by giving optimistic shadows with high value-added to the system more time to execute and commit instead of being aborted in favor of other validating transactions, whose value-added to the system is lower. In this paper we present and evaluate an extension to SCC algorithms that allows for commit deferments.

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.

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.

Timeliness via Speculation for Real-Time Databases

Various concurrency control algorithms differ in the time when conflicts are detected, and in the way they are resolved. In that respect, the Pessimistic and Optimistic Concurrency Control (PCC and OCC) alternatives represent two extremes. PCC locking protocols detect conflicts as soon as they occur and resolve them using blocking. OCC protocols detect conflicts at transaction commit time and resolve them using rollbacks (restarts). For real-time databases, blockages and rollbacks are hazards that increase the likelihood of transactions missing their deadlines. We propose a Speculative Concurrency Control (SCC) technique that minimizes the impact of blockages and rollbacks. SCC relies on the use of added system resources to speculate on potential serialization orders and to ensure that if such serialization orders materialize, the hazards of blockages and roll-backs are minimized. We present a number of SCC-based algorithms that differ in the level of speculation they introduce, and the amount of system resources (mainly memory) they require. We show the performance gains (in terms of number of satisfied timing constraints) to be expected when a representative SCC algorithm (SCC-2S) is adopted.