Blocking reduction for distributed transaction processing within MANETs

Atomic commit protocols for distributed transactions in mobile ad-hoc networks have to consider message delays and network failures. We consider ad-hoc network scenarios, in which participants hold embedded databases and offer services to other participants. Services that are composed of several other services can access and manipulate data of physically different databases. In such a scenario, distributed transaction processing can be used to guarantee atomicity and serializability throughout all databases. However, with problems like message loss, node failure, and network partitioning, mobile environments make it hard to get estimations on the duration of a simple message exchange.In this article, we focus on the problem of setting up reasonable time-outs when guaranteeing atomicity for transaction processing within mobile ad-hoc networks, and we show the effect of setting up “wrong” time-outs on the transaction throughput and blocking time. Our solution, which does not depend on time-outs, shows a better performance in unreliable networks and remarkably reduces the amount of blocking.

[1]  Steven P. Levitan,et al.  An Argument in Favour of Presumed Commit Protocol , 1997, ICDE 1997.

[2]  Bharat K. Bhargava,et al.  Multidimensional Timestamp Protocols for Concurrency Control , 1986, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[3]  Stefan Böttcher,et al.  Avoiding Infinite Blocking of Mobile Transactions , 2007, 11th International Database Engineering and Applications Symposium (IDEAS 2007).

[4]  Le Gruenwald,et al.  An integrated commit protocol for mobile network databases , 2005, 9th International Database Engineering & Application Symposium (IDEAS'05).

[5]  C. Mohan,et al.  Two-phase commit optimizations in a commercial distributed environment , 1995, Distributed and Parallel Databases.

[6]  Jim Gray,et al.  Notes on Data Base Operating Systems , 1978, Advanced Course: Operating Systems.

[7]  J. D. Uiiman,et al.  Principles of Database Systems , 2004, PODS 2004.

[8]  Stefan Covaci,et al.  Java-based intelligent mobile agents for open system management , 1997, Proceedings Ninth IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence.

[9]  Tzone-I Wang,et al.  Mobile Agents for Distributed Transactions of a Distributed Heterogeneous Database System , 2002, DEXA.

[10]  Panos K. Chrysanthis,et al.  Recovery and Performance of Atomic Commit Processing in Distributed Database Systems , 1998 .

[11]  Gottfried Vossen,et al.  Transactional Information Systems: Theory, Algorithms, and the Practice of Concurrency Control and Recovery , 2002 .

[12]  Bharat K. Bhargava,et al.  Maintaining consistency of data in mobile distributed environments , 1995, Proceedings of 15th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems.

[13]  Dale Skeen,et al.  Nonblocking commit protocols , 1981, SIGMOD '81.

[14]  Masaru Kitsuregawa,et al.  Reducing the blocking in two-phase commit with backup sites , 2003, Inf. Process. Lett..

[15]  Panos K. Chrysanthis,et al.  1-2PC: the one-two phase atomic commit protocol , 2004, SAC '04.

[16]  Michael Kifer,et al.  Database Systems : An Application-Oriented Approach , 2005 .

[17]  J. T. Robinson,et al.  On optimistic methods for concurrency control , 1979, TODS.

[18]  Stefan Böttcher,et al.  Dynamic commit tree management for service oriented architectures , 2007, ICEIS.

[19]  Andry Rakotonirainy.  Adaptable transaction consistency for mobile environments , 1998, Proceedings Ninth International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications (Cat. No.98EX130).

[20]  Steven P. Levitan,et al.  An argument in favor of the presumed commit protocol , 1997, Proceedings 13th International Conference on Data Engineering.

[21]  Vijay Kumar,et al.  TCOT-A Timeout-Based Mobile Transaction Commitment Protocol , 2002, IEEE Trans. Computers.

[22]  Irving L. Traiger,et al.  The notions of consistency and predicate locks in a database system , 1976, CACM.

[23]  Matjaz B. Juric,et al.  Business process execution language for web services , 2004 .

[24]  Marc H. Scholl,et al.  Transactional information systems: theory, algorithms, and the practice of concurrency control and recovery , 2001, SGMD.

[25]  Le Gruenwald,et al.  A toggle transaction management technique for mobile multidatabases , 1998, CIKM '98.

[26]  Le Gruenwald,et al.  Reducing Sub-transaction Aborts and Blocking Time Within Atomic Commit Protocols , 2006, BNCOD.

[27]  Philip A. Bernstein,et al.  Categories and Subject Descriptors: H.2.4 [Database Management]: Systems. , 2022 .

[28]  Adam Arkin.  Business process Modeling Language , 2002 .

[29]  Michael Stonebraker,et al.  A Formal Model of Crash Recovery in a Distributed System , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[30]  Thki Hder,et al.  OBSERVATIONS ON OPTIMISTIC CONCURRENCY CONTROL SCHEMES , 2003 .

[31]  Le Gruenwald,et al.  A Failure Tolerating Atomic Commit Protocol for Mobile Environments , 2007, 2007 International Conference on Mobile Data Management.

[32]  Jeffrey D. Ullman,et al.  Principles of Database Systems , 1980 .

[33]  Le Gruenwald,et al.  A pre‐serialization transaction management technique for mobile multidatabases , 2000, Mob. Networks Appl..

[34]  Leslie Lamport,et al.  The part-time parliament , 1998, TOCS.

[35]  Abdelsalam Helal,et al.  A mobile transaction model that captures both the data and movement behavior , 1997, Mob. Networks Appl..

[36]  Sourav S. Bhowmick,et al.  A transaction model and multiversion concurrency control for mobile database systems , 2007, Distributed and Parallel Databases.

[37]  Michael Kifer,et al.  Database Systems: An Application Oriented Approach, Complete Version (2nd Edition) , 2005 .

[38]  Leslie Lamport,et al.  Consensus on transaction commit , 2004, TODS.

[39]  Panos K. Chrysanthis,et al.  Adjourn State Concurrency Control Avoiding Time-Out Problems in Atomic Commit Protocols , 2008, 2008 IEEE 24th International Conference on Data Engineering.