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.

QoS Controllers for the Internet

In this position paper, we review basic control strategies that machines acting as "traffic controllers" could deploy in order to improve the management of Internet services. Such traffic controllers are likely to spur the widespread emergence of advanced applications, which have (so far) been hindered by the inability of the networking infrastructure to deliver on the promise of Quality-of-Service (QoS).

Cortical Dynamics of Feature Binding and Reset: Control of Visual Persistence

An analysis of the reset of visual cortical circuits responsible for the binding or segmentation of visual features into coherent visual forms yields a model that explains properties of visual persistence. The reset mechanisms prevent massive smearing or visual percepts in response to rapidly moving images. The model simulates relationships among psychophysical data showing inverse relations of persistence to flash luminance and duration, greaterr persistence of illusory contours than real contours, a U-shaped temporal function for persistence of illusory contours, a reduction of persistence: due to adaptation with a stimulus of like orientation, an increase or persistence due to adaptation with a stimulus of perpendicular orientation, and an increase of persistence with spatial separation of a masking stimulus. The model suggests that a combination of habituative, opponent, and endstopping mechanisms prevent smearing and limit persistence. Earlier work with the model has analyzed data about boundary formation, texture segregation, shape-from-shading, and figure-ground separation. Thus, several types of data support each model mechanism and new predictions are made.