Correctness issues in workflow management

Workflow management is a technique to integrate and automate the execution of steps that comprise a complex process, e.g., a business process. Workflow management systems (WFMSs) primarily evolved from industry to cater to the growing demand for office automation tools among businesses. Coincidentally, database researchers developed several extended transaction models to handle similar applications. Although the goals of both the communities were the same, the issues they focused on were different. The workflow community primarily focused on modelling aspects to accurately capture the data and control flow requirements between the steps that comprise a workflow, while the database community focused on correctness aspects to ensure data consistency of sub-transactions that comprise a transaction. However, we now see a confluence of some of the ideas, with additional features being gradually offered by WFMSs. This paper provides an overview of correctness in workflow management. Correctness is an important aspect of WFMSs and a proper understanding of the available concepts and techniques by WFMS developers and workflow designers will help in building workflows that are flexible enough to capture the requirements of real world applications and robust enough to provide the necessary correctness and reliability properties. We first enumerate the correctness issues that have to be considered to ensure data consistency. Then we survey techniques that have been proposed or are being used in WFMSs for ensuring correctness of workflows. These techniques emerge from the areas of workflow management, extended transaction models, multidatabases and transactional workflows. Finally, we present some open issues related to correctness of workflows in the presence of concurrency and failures.

[1]  Charles T. Davies,et al.  Data Processing Spheres of Control , 1978, IBM Syst. J..

[2]  Michael J. Franklin,et al.  Concurrency Control and Recovery , 2014, Encyclopedia of Database Systems.

[3]  Amit P. Sheth,et al.  On Transactional Workflows , 1993, IEEE Data Eng. Bull..

[4]  Amit P. Sheth,et al.  On serializability of multidatabase transactions through forced local conflicts , 1991, [1991] Proceedings. Seventh International Conference on Data Engineering.

[5]  Hans-Jörg Schek,et al.  Merging application-centric and data-centric approaches to support transaction-oriented multi-system workflows , 1993, SGMD.

[6]  Frank Leymann,et al.  Supporting Business Transactions Via Partial Backward Recovery In Workflow Management Systems , 1995, BTW.

[7]  Amit P. Sheth,et al.  Specification and Execution of Transactional Workflows , 1995, Modern Database Systems.

[8]  Özgür Ulusoy,et al.  A Transaction Model for Multidatabase Systems , 1996, Euro-Par, Vol. II.

[9]  C. Mohan.  State of the art in workflow management research and products , 1996, SIGMOD '96.

[10]  Frank Leymann,et al.  Business process management with FlowMark , 1994, Proceedings of COMPCON '94.

[11]  Gustavo Alonso,et al.  Advanced transaction models in workflow contexts , 1996, Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Data Engineering.

[12]  Abraham Silberschatz,et al.  A Formal Approach to Recovery by Compensating Transactions , 1990, VLDB.

[13]  Nancy A. Lynch,et al.  Multilevel atomicity—a new correctness criterion for database concurrency control , 1983, TODS.

[14]  Amit P. Sheth,et al.  Specifying and Enforcing Intertask Dependencies , 1993, VLDB.

[15]  Marek Rusinkiewicz.  On Transactional Work ows , 1993 .

[16]  Munindar P. Singh.  Synthesizing distributed constrained events from transactional workflow specifications , 1996, Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Data Engineering.

[17]  Andrzej Cichocki,et al.  Towards a Model for Multidatabase Transactions , 1992, Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst..

[18]  Betty Salzberg,et al.  Bulletin of the Technical Committee on Data Engineering , 1995 .

[19]  Andreas Reuter,et al.  The ConTract Model , 1991, Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications.

[20]  E. B. Moss,et al.  Nested Transactions: An Approach to Reliable Distributed Computing , 1985 .

[21]  Ahmed K. Elmagarmid,et al.  A Multidatabase Transaction Model for InterBase , 1990, VLDB.

[22]  Ahmed K. Elmagarmid,et al.  Transaction Models for Advanced Database Applications , 1991 .

[23]  Sandra Heiler,et al.  Distributed Object Management , 1992, Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst..

[24]  Rajeev Rastogi,et al.  ConTracts - A Low-Level Mechanism for Building General-Purpose Workflow Management-Systems. , 1995 .

[25]  Mark F. Hornick,et al.  Customizing Transaction Models and Mechanisms in a Programmable Environment Supporting Reliable Workflow Automation , 1996, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng..

[26]  Hector Garcia-Molina,et al.  Using semantic knowledge for transaction processing in a distributed database , 1983, TODS.

[27]  Umeshwar Dayal,et al.  A transactional nested process management system , 1996, Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Data Engineering.

[28]  Rajeev Rastogi,et al.  The concurrency control problem in multidatabases: characteristics and solutions , 1992, SIGMOD '92.

[29]  Bharat K. Bhargava,et al.  Ensuring relaxed atomicity for flexible transactions in multidatabase systems , 1994, SIGMOD '94.

[30]  M. Tamer Özsu,et al.  Using semantic knowledge of transactions to increase concurrency , 1989, TODS.

[31]  Frank Manola,et al.  Specification and management of extended transactions in a programmable transaction environment , 1994, Proceedings of 1994 IEEE 10th International Conference on Data Engineering.

[32]  Jim Gray,et al.  The Transaction Concept: Virtues and Limitations (Invited Paper) , 1981, VLDB.

[33]  Amit P. Sheth,et al.  Concurrency control and recovery of multidatabase work flows in telecommunication applications , 1993, SIGMOD Conference.