Transaction management in the R* distributed database management system
ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS)
Concurrency control and recovery in database systems
Concurrency control and recovery in database systems
A theory of reliability in database systems
Journal of the ACM (JACM)
Federated database systems for managing distributed, heterogeneous, and autonomous databases
ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) - Special issue on heterogeneous databases
A comparison of the Byzantine agreement problem and the transaction commit problem
Fault-tolerant distributed computing
Coordinator log transaction execution protocol
Distributed and Parallel Databases
X/Open CAE specification: distributed transaction processing: CPI-C specification, version 2
X/Open CAE specification: distributed transaction processing: CPI-C specification, version 2
Transaction Processing: Concepts and Techniques
Transaction Processing: Concepts and Techniques
Overview of multidatabase transaction management
The VLDB Journal — The International Journal on Very Large Data Bases
Notes on Data Base Operating Systems
Operating Systems, An Advanced Course
PicoDMBS: Scaling Down Database Techniques for the Smartcard
VLDB '00 Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases
The inherent cost of nonblocking commitment
PODC '83 Proceedings of the second annual ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing
1-2PC: the one-two phase atomic commit protocol
Proceedings of the 2004 ACM symposium on Applied computing
On the Respective Power of ◊P and ◊S to Solve One-Shot Agreement Problems
IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems
International Journal of Intelligent Information and Database Systems
International Journal of Intelligent Information and Database Systems
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
The current standard in governing distributed transaction termination is the so-called Two-Phase Commit protocol (2PC). The first phase of 2PC is a voting phase, where the participants in the transaction are given an ultimate right to abort that transaction. Giving up that veto right from all participants reduces the overhead of the atomic commitment protocol but also imposes some restrictions on the concurrency control and recovery protocols employed by the participants in the transaction.This paper gives, for the first time, a precise abstract specification of the Dictatorial Atomic Commitment (DAC) problem, resulting from removing veto rights from the traditional Atomic Commitment (AC) problem. We characterize transactional systems that are compatible with that specification in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions on concurrency control and recovery protocols, and discuss the practical impacts of those conditions. From this study, we capitalize on existing protocols that solve the DAC problem, and propose a new protocol that broadens the applicability of dictatorial transaction processing in order to meet the requirements of today's distributed environments. We point out interesting performance tradeoffs, and describe the implementation of our protocol in the context of current transactional standards, initially designed with 2PC in mind.