1.49k likes | 1.62k Views
CS 245: Database System Principles Notes 09: Concurrency Control. Hector Garcia-Molina. Chapter 18 [18] Concurrency Control. T1 T2 … Tn. DB (consistency constraints). Example:. T1: Read(A) T2: Read(A) A A+100 A A 2 Write(A) Write(A) Read(B) Read(B)
E N D
CS 245: Database System PrinciplesNotes 09: Concurrency Control Hector Garcia-Molina Notes 09
Chapter 18 [18] Concurrency Control T1 T2 … Tn DB (consistency constraints) Notes 09
Example: T1: Read(A) T2: Read(A) A A+100 A A2 Write(A) Write(A) Read(B) Read(B) B B+100 B B2 Write(B) Write(B) Constraint: A=B Notes 09
Schedule A T1 T2 Read(A); A A+100 Write(A); Read(B); B B+100; Write(B); Read(A);A A2; Write(A); Read(B);B B2; Write(B); Notes 09
A B 25 25 125 125 250 250 250 250 Schedule A T1 T2 Read(A); A A+100 Write(A); Read(B); B B+100; Write(B); Read(A);A A2; Write(A); Read(B);B B2; Write(B); Notes 09
Schedule B T1 T2 Read(A);A A2; Write(A); Read(B);B B2; Write(B); Read(A); A A+100 Write(A); Read(B); B B+100; Write(B); Notes 09
A B 25 25 50 50 150 150 150 150 Schedule B T1 T2 Read(A);A A2; Write(A); Read(B);B B2; Write(B); Read(A); A A+100 Write(A); Read(B); B B+100; Write(B); Notes 09
Schedule C T1 T2 Read(A); A A+100 Write(A); Read(A);A A2; Write(A); Read(B); B B+100; Write(B); Read(B);B B2; Write(B); Notes 09
A B 25 25 125 250 125 250 250 250 Schedule C T1 T2 Read(A); A A+100 Write(A); Read(A);A A2; Write(A); Read(B); B B+100; Write(B); Read(B);B B2; Write(B); Notes 09
Schedule D T1 T2 Read(A); A A+100 Write(A); Read(A);A A2; Write(A); Read(B);B B2; Write(B); Read(B); B B+100; Write(B); Notes 09
A B 25 25 125 250 50 150 250 150 Schedule D T1 T2 Read(A); A A+100 Write(A); Read(A);A A2; Write(A); Read(B);B B2; Write(B); Read(B); B B+100; Write(B); Notes 09
Same as Schedule D but with new T2’ Schedule E T1 T2’ Read(A); A A+100 Write(A); Read(A);A A1; Write(A); Read(B);B B1; Write(B); Read(B); B B+100; Write(B); Notes 09
A B 25 25 125 125 25 125 125 125 Same as Schedule D but with new T2’ Schedule E T1 T2’ Read(A); A A+100 Write(A); Read(A);A A1; Write(A); Read(B);B B1; Write(B); Read(B); B B+100; Write(B); Notes 09
Want schedules that are “good”, regardless of • initial state and • transaction semantics • Only look at order of read and writes Example: Sc=r1(A)w1(A)r2(A)w2(A)r1(B)w1(B)r2(B)w2(B) Notes 09
Example: Sc=r1(A)w1(A)r2(A)w2(A)r1(B)w1(B)r2(B)w2(B) Sc’=r1(A)w1(A) r1(B)w1(B)r2(A)w2(A)r2(B)w2(B) T1 T2 Notes 09
However, for Sd: Sd=r1(A)w1(A)r2(A)w2(A) r2(B)w2(B)r1(B)w1(B) • as a matter of fact, • T2 must precede T1 • in any equivalent schedule, • i.e., T2 T1 Notes 09
T2 T1 • Also, T1 T2 T1 T2 Sd cannot be rearranged into a serial schedule Sd is not “equivalent” to any serial schedule Sd is “bad” Notes 09
Returning to Sc Sc=r1(A)w1(A)r2(A)w2(A)r1(B)w1(B)r2(B)w2(B) T1 T2 T1 T2 Notes 09
Returning to Sc Sc=r1(A)w1(A)r2(A)w2(A)r1(B)w1(B)r2(B)w2(B) T1 T2 T1 T2 no cycles Sc is “equivalent” to a serial schedule (in this case T1,T2) Notes 09
Concepts Transaction: sequence of ri(x), wi(x) actions Conflicting actions: r1(A) w2(A) w1(A) w2(A) r1(A) w2(A) Schedule: represents chronological order in which actions are executed Serial schedule: no interleaving of actions or transactions Notes 09
Is it OK to model reads & writes as occurring at a single pointin time in a schedule? • S=… r1(x) … w2(b) … Notes 09
What about conflicting, concurrent actions on same object? start r1(A)end r1(A) start w2(A)end w2(A) time Notes 09
What about conflicting, concurrent actions on same object? start r1(A)end r1(A) start w2(A)end w2(A) time • Assume equivalent to either r1(A) w2(A) • or w2(A) r1(A) • low level synchronization mechanism • Assumption called “atomic actions” Notes 09
Definition S1, S2 are conflict equivalentschedules if S1 can be transformed into S2 by a series of swaps on non-conflicting actions. Notes 09
Definition A schedule is conflict serializable if it is conflict equivalent to some serial schedule. Notes 09
Precedence graph P(S) (S is schedule) Nodes: transactions in S Arcs: Ti Tj whenever - pi(A), qj(A) are actions in S - pi(A) <S qj(A) - at least one of pi, qj is a write Notes 09
Exercise: • What is P(S) forS = w3(A) w2(C) r1(A) w1(B) r1(C) w2(A) r4(A) w4(D) • Is S serializable? Notes 09
Another Exercise: • What is P(S) forS = w1(A) r2(A) r3(A) w4(A) ? Notes 09
Lemma S1, S2 conflict equivalent P(S1)=P(S2) Notes 09
Proof: Assume P(S1) P(S2) Ti: Ti Tj in S1 and not in S2 S1 = …pi(A)... qj(A)… pi, qj S2 = …qj(A)…pi(A)... conflict S1, S2 not conflict equivalent Lemma S1, S2 conflict equivalent P(S1)=P(S2) Notes 09
Counter example: S1=w1(A) r2(A) w2(B) r1(B) S2=r2(A) w1(A) r1(B) w2(B) Note: P(S1)=P(S2) S1, S2 conflict equivalent Notes 09
Theorem P(S1) acyclic S1 conflict serializable () Assume S1 is conflict serializable Ss: Ss, S1 conflict equivalent P(Ss)=P(S1) P(S1) acyclic since P(Ss) is acyclic Notes 09
Theorem P(S1) acyclic S1 conflict serializable T1 T2 T3 T4 () Assume P(S1) is acyclic Transform S1 as follows: (1) Take T1 to be transaction with no incident arcs (2) Move all T1 actions to the front S1 = ……. qj(A)…….p1(A)….. (3) we now have S1 = < T1 actions ><... rest ...> (4) repeat above steps to serialize rest! Notes 09
How to enforce serializable schedules? Option 1: run system, recording P(S); at end of day, check for P(S) cycles and declare if execution was good Notes 09
How to enforce serializable schedules? Option 2: prevent P(S) cycles from occurring T1 T2 ….. Tn Scheduler DB Notes 09
A locking protocol Two new actions: lock (exclusive): li (A) unlock: ui (A) T1 T2 lock table scheduler Notes 09
Rule #1: Well-formed transactions Ti: … li(A) … pi(A) … ui(A) ... Notes 09
Rule #2 Legal scheduler S = …….. li(A) ………... ui(A) ……... no lj(A) Notes 09
Exercise: • What schedules are legal?What transactions are well-formed? S1 = l1(A)l1(B)r1(A)w1(B)l2(B)u1(A)u1(B) r2(B)w2(B)u2(B)l3(B)r3(B)u3(B) S2 = l1(A)r1(A)w1(B)u1(A)u1(B) l2(B)r2(B)w2(B)l3(B)r3(B)u3(B) S3 = l1(A)r1(A)u1(A)l1(B)w1(B)u1(B) l2(B)r2(B)w2(B)u2(B)l3(B)r3(B)u3(B) Notes 09
Exercise: • What schedules are legal?What transactions are well-formed? S1 = l1(A)l1(B)r1(A)w1(B)l2(B)u1(A)u1(B) r2(B)w2(B)u2(B)l3(B)r3(B)u3(B) S2 = l1(A)r1(A)w1(B)u1(A)u1(B) l2(B)r2(B)w2(B)l3(B)r3(B)u3(B) u2(B)? S3 = l1(A)r1(A)u1(A)l1(B)w1(B)u1(B) l2(B)r2(B)w2(B)u2(B)l3(B)r3(B)u3(B) Notes 09
Schedule F T1 T2 l1(A);Read(A) A A+100;Write(A);u1(A) l2(A);Read(A) A Ax2;Write(A);u2(A) l2(B);Read(B) B Bx2;Write(B);u2(B) l1(B);Read(B) B B+100;Write(B);u1(B) Notes 09
Schedule F A B T1 T2 25 25 l1(A);Read(A) A A+100;Write(A);u1(A) 125 l2(A);Read(A) A Ax2;Write(A);u2(A) 250 l2(B);Read(B) B Bx2;Write(B);u2(B) 50 l1(B);Read(B) B B+100;Write(B);u1(B) 150 250 150 Notes 09
Rule #3 Two phase locking (2PL)for transactions Ti = ……. li(A) ………... ui(A) ……... no unlocks no locks Notes 09
# locks held by Ti Time Growing Shrinking Phase Phase Notes 09
Schedule G T1 T2 l1(A);Read(A) A A+100;Write(A) l1(B); u1(A) l2(A);Read(A) A Ax2;Write(A);l2(B) delayed Notes 09
Schedule G T1 T2 l1(A);Read(A) A A+100;Write(A) l1(B); u1(A) l2(A);Read(A) A Ax2;Write(A);l2(B) Read(B);B B+100 Write(B); u1(B) delayed Notes 09
Schedule G T1 T2 l1(A);Read(A) A A+100;Write(A) l1(B); u1(A) l2(A);Read(A) A Ax2;Write(A);l2(B) Read(B);B B+100 Write(B); u1(B) l2(B); u2(A);Read(B) B Bx2;Write(B);u2(B); delayed Notes 09
Schedule H (T2 reversed) T1 T2 l1(A); Read(A) l2(B);Read(B) A A+100;Write(A) B Bx2;Write(B) l1(B) l2(A) delayed delayed Notes 09
Assume deadlocked transactions are rolled back • They have no effect • They do not appear in schedule E.g., Schedule H = This space intentionally left blank! Notes 09