Semantical Considerations on Workflows: An Algebra for Intertask Dependencies

Workflows are composite multitransaction activities occurring in heterogeneous environments. They relax the semantic properties of traditional transactions to accommodate the demands of such environments. It is important that workflows be specified declaratively, reasoned about formally, and scheduled automatically. Declarative approaches based on intertask dependencies are prominent in the literature. However, extant approaches often lack a formal semantics, or fail to meet other important criteria. Also, they do not carefully distinguish event types from instances, a distinction that is crucial when the constraint that tasks are loop-free is relaxed. We propose an approach that gives a rigorous formal semantics for dependencies and meets the above conditions. Our approach uses algebraic expressions to represent dependencies and uses symbolic reasoning to take scheduling decisions. It can form the basis of a programming language for workflows.

[1]  Ming-Chien Shan,et al.  Third generation TP monitors: a database challenge , 1993, SIGMOD '93.

[2]  E. Allen Emerson,et al.  Temporal and Modal Logic , 1991, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume B: Formal Models and Sematics.

[3]  Munindar P. Singh,et al.  Workflow Execution Through Distributed Events , 1994, COMAD.

[4]  Andreas Reuter,et al.  Transaction Processing: Concepts and Techniques , 1992 .

[5]  Udo W. Lipeck,et al.  Transformation of Dynamic Integrity Constraints into Transaction Specifications , 1990, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[6]  Roger Günthör Extended transaction processing based on dependency rules , 1993, Proceedings RIDE-IMS `93: Third International Workshop on Research Issues in Data Engineering: Interoperability in Multidatabase Systems.

[7]  Michael Kifer,et al.  Database Programming in Transaction Logic , 1993, DBPL.

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

[9]  Johannes Klein Advanced rule driven transaction management , 1991, COMPCON Spring '91 Digest of Papers.

[10]  Matthias Nussbaum Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications , 1992 .

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

[12]  Marian H. Nodine,et al.  Supporting long-running tasks on an evolving multidatabase using interactions and events , 1993, [1993] Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Information Systems.

[13]  Panos K. Chrysanthis,et al.  ACTA: The SAGA Continues , 1992, Database Transaction Models for Advanced Applications.

[14]  Ambuj K. Singh,et al.  Consistency and orderability: semantics-based correctness criteria for databases , 1993, TODS.

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

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

[17]  Munindar P. Singh,et al.  Relaxed transaction processing , 1994, SIGMOD '94.

[18]  Johannes Klein,et al.  Coordinating multi-transaction activities , 1990 .

[19]  Vaughan R. Pratt,et al.  Action Logic and Pure Induction , 1990, JELIA.

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