Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/2997465.2997495acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesrtnsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A Formal Approach for Flexible Modeling and Analysis of Transaction Timeliness and Isolation

Published: 19 October 2016 Publication History

Abstract

Traditional Concurrency Control (CC) mechanisms ensure absence of undesired interference in transaction-based systems and enforce isolation. However, CC may introduce unpredictable delays that could lead to breached timeliness, which is unwanted for real-time transactions. To avoid deadline misses, some CC algorithms relax isolation in favor of timeliness, whereas others limit possible interleavings by leveraging real-time constraints and preserve isolation. Selecting an appropriate CC algorithm that can guarantee timeliness at an acceptable level of isolation thus becomes an essential concern for system designers. However, trading-off isolation for timeliness is not easy with existing analysis techniques in database and real-time communities. In this paper, we propose to use model checking of a timed automata model of the transaction system, in order to check the traded-off timeliness and isolation. Our solution provides modularization for the basic transactional constituents, which enables flexible modeling and composition of various candidate CC algorithms, and thus reduces the effort of selecting the appropriate CC algorithm.

References

[1]
R. K. Abbott and H. Garcia-Molina. Scheduling real-time transactions: A performance evaluation. ACM Trans. Database Syst., 17(3):513--560, Sept. 1992.
[2]
A. Adya, B. Liskov, and P. O'Neil. Generalized isolation level definitions. In Proceedings of the 16th ICDE, pages 67--78, 2000.
[3]
R. Alur, C. Courcoubetis, and D. Dill. Model-checking in dense real-time. Information and Computation, 104(1):2--34, 1993.
[4]
R. Alur and D. L. Dill. A theory of timed automata. Theoretical computer science, 126(2):183--235, 1994.
[5]
S. Cai, B. Gallina, D. Nyström, and C. Seceleanu. Trading-off data consistency for timeliness in real-time database systems. In 27th ECRTS, pages 13--16, 2015.
[6]
S. Cai, B. Gallina, D. Nyström, and C. Seceleanu. Flexible verification of transaction timeliness and isolation. http://www.es.mdh.se/publications/4276-, 2016.
[7]
P. K. Chrysanthis and K. Ramamritham. Synthesis of extended transaction models using acta. ACM Trans. Database Syst., 19(3):450--491, 1994.
[8]
A. Datta and S. Son. A study of concurrency control in real-time, active database systems. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng., 14(3):465--484, 2002.
[9]
A. David, K. Larsen, A. Legay, M. Mikučionis, D. Poulsen, J. van Vliet, and Z. Wang. Statistical model checking for networks of priced timed automata. In Formal Modeling and Analysis of Timed Systems, pages 80--96. Springer, 2011.
[10]
L. B. C. DiPippo and V. F. Wolfe. Object-based semantic real-time concurrency control. In Proceedings of RTSS, pages 87--96, 1993.
[11]
R. A. Elmasri and S. B. Navathe. Fundamentals of Database Systems. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., 2004.
[12]
B. Gallina. PRISMA: a software product line-oriented process for the requirements engineering of flexible transaction models. PhD thesis, University of Luxembourg, 2010.
[13]
B. Gallina, N. Guelfi, and P. Kelsen. Towards an alloy formal model for flexible advanced transactional model development. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual IEEE Software Engineering Workshop, pages 94--103, 2009.
[14]
J. Gray and A. Reuter. Transaction Processing: Concepts and Techniques. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., 1992.
[15]
J. N. Gray, R. A. Lorie, G. R. Putzolu, and I. L. Traiger. Readings in database systems. chapter Granularity of Locks and Degrees of Consistency in a Shared Data Base, pages 175--193. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., 1998.
[16]
S. Han, K. Lam, J. Wang, K. Ramamritham, and A. Mok. On co-scheduling of update and control transactions in real-time sensing and control systems: Algorithms, analysis, and performance. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng., 25(10):2325--2342, 2013.
[17]
ISO/IEC 9075:1992 Database Language SQL. Standard, International Organization for Standardization.
[18]
M. Kot. Modeling selected real-time database concurrency control protocols in uppaal. Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering, 5(2):129--138, 2009.
[19]
R. Lanotte, A. Maggiolo-Schettini, P. Milazzo, and A. Troina. Modeling long-running transactions with communicating hierarchical timed automata. In Formal Methods for Open Object-Based Distributed Systems, pages 108--122. Springer, 2006.
[20]
K. G. Larsen, P. Pettersson, and Y. Wang. Uppaal in a nutshell. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer, 1(1):134--152, 1997.
[21]
R. Milner. Communication and concurrency, volume 84. Prentice hall New York etc., 1989.
[22]
K. Ramamritham. Real-time databases. Distributed and Parallel Databases, 1(2):199--226, 1993.
[23]
L. Sha, R. Rajkumar, S. H. Son, and C. H. Chang. A real-time locking protocol. IEEE Trans. Comput., 40(7):793--800, 1991.
[24]
X. Song and J. Liu. Maintaining temporal consistency: pessimistic vs. optimistic concurrency control. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng., 7(5):786--796, 1995.
[25]
J. A. Stankovic, S. H. Son, and J. Hansson. Misconceptions about real-time databases. Computer, 32(6):29--36, 1999.
[26]
R. Wilhelm, J. Engblom, A. Ermedahl, N. Holsti, S. Thesing, D. Whalley, G. Bernat, C. Ferdinand, R. Heckmann, T. Mitra, F. Mueller, I. Puaut, P. Puschner, J. Staschulat, and P. Stenström. The worst-case execution-time problem--overview of methods and survey of tools. ACM Trans. Embed. Comput. Syst., 7(3):36:1--36:53, 2008.
[27]
H. C. Wong and A. Burns. Schedulability analysis for the abort-and-restart (ar) model. In Proceedings of 22nd RTNS, pages 119:119--119:128, 2014.
[28]
M. Xiong and K. Ramamritham. Specification and analysis of transactions in real-time active databases. In Real-Time Database and Information Systems: Research Advances, volume 420, pages 327--351. Springer, 1997.

Cited By

View all
  • (2020)Specification and automated verification of atomic concurrent real-time transactionsSoftware and Systems Modeling10.1007/s10270-020-00819-0Online publication date: 29-Jul-2020
  • (2019)Statistical Model Checking for Real-Time Database Management Systems: A Case Study2019 24th IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA)10.1109/ETFA.2019.8869326(306-313)Online publication date: Sep-2019
  • (2018)Specification and Formal Verification of Atomic Concurrent Real-Time Transactions2018 IEEE 23rd Pacific Rim International Symposium on Dependable Computing (PRDC)10.1109/PRDC.2018.00021(104-114)Online publication date: Dec-2018
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
RTNS '16: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Real-Time Networks and Systems
October 2016
353 pages
ISBN:9781450347877
DOI:10.1145/2997465
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

In-Cooperation

  • REGIONB: Region Bretagne

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 19 October 2016

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Transaction management
  2. concurrency control
  3. isolation
  4. model checking
  5. timeliness

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Conference

RTNS '16

Acceptance Rates

RTNS '16 Paper Acceptance Rate 34 of 75 submissions, 45%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 119 of 255 submissions, 47%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)5
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 18 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2020)Specification and automated verification of atomic concurrent real-time transactionsSoftware and Systems Modeling10.1007/s10270-020-00819-0Online publication date: 29-Jul-2020
  • (2019)Statistical Model Checking for Real-Time Database Management Systems: A Case Study2019 24th IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA)10.1109/ETFA.2019.8869326(306-313)Online publication date: Sep-2019
  • (2018)Specification and Formal Verification of Atomic Concurrent Real-Time Transactions2018 IEEE 23rd Pacific Rim International Symposium on Dependable Computing (PRDC)10.1109/PRDC.2018.00021(104-114)Online publication date: Dec-2018
  • (2018)Effective Test Suite Design for Detecting Concurrency Control Faults in Distributed Transaction SystemsLeveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation. Distributed Systems10.1007/978-3-030-03424-5_24(355-374)Online publication date: 31-Oct-2018
  • (2017)Customized real-time data management for automotive systems: A case studyIECON 2017 - 43rd Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society10.1109/IECON.2017.8217475(8397-8404)Online publication date: Oct-2017

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media