1. International Computer Institute, Izmir, Turkey Transactions Asst. Prof. Dr. İlker Kocabaş UBİ502 at http://ube.ege.edu.tr/~ikocabas/teaching/ubi502/index.html

2. 11.2 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Transactions 1. Introduction 2. Concurrent Execution and Schedules 3. Serializability 4. Recoverability 5. Transaction Definition in SQL 6. Example

3. 11.3 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems 1. Introduction A transaction is a unit of program execution that accesses and possibly updates various data items A transaction must see a consistent database During transaction execution the database may be inconsistent When the transaction is committed, the database must be consistent Two main issues to deal with:  Failures, e.g. hardware failures and system crashes  Concurrency, for simultaneous execution of multiple transactions Process-1 Process-2 Process-3

4. 11.4 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems ACID Atomicity: Either all operations of the transaction are properly reflected in the database or none are Consistency: Execution of a transaction in isolation preserves the consistency of the database Isolation: Although multiple transactions may execute concurrently, each transaction must be unaware of other concurrently executing transactions; intermediate transaction results must be hidden from other concurrently executed transactions Durability: After a transaction completes successfully, the changes it has made to the database persist, even if there are system failures To preserve integrity of data, the database system must ensure:

5. 11.5 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Example of Fund Transfer Transfer $50 from account A to B: 1.read(A) 2.A := A – 50 3.write(A) 4.read(B) 5.B := B + 50 6.write(B) Consistency: the sum of A and B is unchanged by the execution of the transaction. Atomicity: if the transaction fails after step 3 and before step 6, the system should ensure that its updates are not reflected in the database, else an inconsistency will result. Durability: once the user has been notified that the transaction has completed, the updates to the database by the transaction must persist despite failures Isolation: between steps 3 and 6, no other transaction should access the partially updated database, or else it will see an inconsistent state (the sum A + B will be less than it should be).

6. 11.6 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Transaction State Active, the initial state; the transaction stays in this state while it is executing Partially committed, after the final statement has been executed. Committed, after successful completion. Failed, after the discovery that normal execution can no longer proceed. Aborted, after the transaction has been rolled back and the database restored to its state prior to the start of the transaction.

7. 11.7 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Naive Approach: Shadow-Database  assume only one transaction is active at a time  db_pointer always points to the current consistent copy of the database  all updates are made on a copy of the database, and db_pointer is made to point to the updated copy only after the transaction reaches partial commit and all updated pages have been flushed to disk  if the transaction fails, the old consistent copy pointed to by db_pointer can be used, and the shadow copy can be deleted Assumes disks to not fail Useful for text editors, but extremely inefficient for large database -- executing a single transaction requires copying the entire database!

8. 11.8 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems 2. Concurrent Execution and Schedules Concurrent execution: executing transactions simultaneously has the following advantages:  increased processor and disk utilization, leading to better throughput  one transaction can be using the CPU while another is reading from or writing to the disk  reduced average response time for transactions: short transactions need not wait behind long ones Concurrency control schemes: these are mechanisms to achieve isolation  to control the interaction among the concurrent transactions in order to prevent them from destroying the consistency of the database Schedules: sequences that indicate the chronological order in which instructions of concurrent transactions are executed  a schedule for a set of transactions must consist of all instructions of those transactions  must preserve the order in which the instructions appear in each individual transaction

9. 11.9 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Example Schedules Let T 1 transfer $50 from A to B, and T 2 transfer 10% of the balance from A to B. The following is a serial schedule (Schedule 1 in the text), in which T 1 is followed by T 2.

10. 11.10 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Example Schedule (cont) Let T 1 and T 2 be the transactions defined previously. The following schedule (Schedule 3 in the text) is not a serial schedule, but it is equivalent to Schedule 1. In both Schedule 1 and 3, the sum A + B is preserved.

11. 11.11 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Example Schedules (cont) The following concurrent schedule (Schedule 4 in the book) does not preserve the value of the the sum A + B

12. 11.12 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems 3. Serializability Basic Assumption – Each transaction, on its own, preserves database consistency  i.e. serial execution of transactions preserves database consistency A (possibly concurrent) schedule is serializable if it is equivalent to a serial schedule Different forms of schedule equivalence give rise to the notions of conflict serializability and view serializability Simplifying assumptions:  ignore operations other than read and write instructions  assume that transactions may perform arbitrary computations on data in local buffers between reads and writes  simplified schedules consist only of reads and writes

13. 11.13 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Conflict Serializability Instructions l a and l b of transactions T a and T b respectively, conflict if and only if there exists some item Q accessed by both l a and l b, and at least one of these instructions wrote Q. 1. l a = read(Q), l b = read(Q). l a and l b don’t conflict. 2. l a = read(Q), l b = write(Q). They conflict. 3. l a = write(Q), l b = read(Q). They conflict 4. l a = write(Q), l b = write(Q). They conflict Intuitively, a conflict between l a and l b forces a (logical) temporal order between them If l a and l b are consecutive in a schedule and they do not conflict, their results would remain the same even if they had been interchanged in the ordering

14. 11.14 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Conflict Serializability (cont) If a schedule S can be transformed into a schedule S´ by a series of swaps of non-conflicting instructions, we say that S and S´ are conflict equivalent. We say that a schedule S is conflict serializable if it is conflict equivalent to a serial schedule Example of a schedule that is not conflict serializable: T 3 T 4 read(Q) write(Q) write(Q) We are unable to swap instructions in the above schedule to obtain either the serial schedule, or the serial schedule.

15. 11.15 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Conflict Serializability (cont) Schedule 3 below can be transformed into Schedule 1, a serial schedule where T 2 follows T 1, by series of swaps of non-conflicting instructions. Therefore Schedule 3 is conflict serializable.

16. 11.16 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems View Serializability Let S and S´ be two schedules with the same set of transactions. S and S´ are view equivalent if the following three conditions are met, where Q is a data item and T i is a transaction:  If Ti reads the initial value of Q in schedule S, then Ti must, in schedule S´, also read the initial value of Q  If Ti executes read(Q) in schedule S, and that value was produced by transaction Tj (if any), then transaction Ti must in schedule S´ also read the value of Q that was produced by transaction Tj  The transaction (if any) that performs the final write(Q) operation in schedule S (for any data item Q) must perform the final write(Q) operation in schedule S´ NB. view equivalence is also based purely on reads and writes

17. 11.17 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems View Serializability (cont) A schedule S is view serializable it is view equivalent to a serial schedule Every conflict serializable schedule is also view serializable Schedule 9 (from book) — a schedule which is view-serializable but not conflict serializable Every view serializable schedule that is not conflict serializable has blind writes

18. 11.18 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Other Notions of Serializability This schedule produces the same outcome as the serial schedule However it is not conflict equivalent or view equivalent to it Determining such equivalence requires analysis of operations other than read and write

19. 11.19 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Testing for Serializability Consider some schedule of a set of transactions T 1, T 2,..., T n Precedence graph: a directed graph where the vertices are transaction names We draw an arc from T a to T b if the two transaction conflict, and T a accessed the data item before T b We may label the arc by the item that was accessed Example: x y

20. 11.20 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Example Schedule and Precedence Graph T 1 T 2 T 3 T 4 T 5 read(X) read(Y) read(Z) read(V) read(W) read(W) read(Y) write(Y) write(Z) read(U) read(Y) write(Y) read(Z) write(Z) read(U) write(U) T3T3 T4T4 T1T1 T2T2

21. 11.21 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Testing for Serializability (cont) A schedule is conflict serializable if and only if its precedence graph is acyclic  Cycle-detection algorithms exist which take order n 2 time, where n is the number of vertices in the graph  If precedence graph is acyclic, the serializability order can be obtained by a topological sorting of the graph. This is a linear order consistent with the partial order of the graph. For example, a serializability order for this graph is T 2  T 1  T 3  T 4  T 5 The precedence graph test for conflict serializability must be modified to apply to a test for view serializability  The problem of checking if a schedule is view serializable is NP-complete. Thus existence of an efficient algorithm is unlikely. However practical algorithms that just check some sufficient conditions for view serializability can still be used Example of an acyclic precedence graph

22. 11.22 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Concurrency Control vs. Serializability Tests Goal – to develop concurrency control protocols that will ensure serializability These protocols will impose a discipline that avoids nonseralizable schedules A common concurrency control protocol uses locks  while one transaction is accessing a data item, no other transaction can modify it  require a transaction to lock the item before accessing it  two standard lock modes are “shared” (read-only) and “exclusive” (read-write)

23. 11.23 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems 4. Recoverability Recoverable schedule: if a transaction T j reads a data item previously written by a transaction T i, the commit operation of T i appears before the commit operation of T j The following schedule (Schedule 11) is not recoverable if T 9 commits immediately after the read If T 8 should abort, T 9 would have read (and possibly shown to the user) an inconsistent database state. Hence database must ensure that schedules are recoverable Need to address the effect of transaction failures on concurrently running transactions Commit

24. 11.24 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Recoverability (cont) Cascading rollback – a single transaction failure leads to a series of transaction rollbacks Consider the following schedule where none of the transactions has yet committed (so the schedule is recoverable) If T 10 fails, T 11 and T 12 must also be rolled back Can lead to the undoing of a significant amount of work Cascadeless schedules — cascading rollbacks cannot occur; for each pair of transactions T i and T j such that T j reads a data item previously written by T i, the commit operation of T i appears before the read operation of T j Every cascadeless schedule is also recoverable It is desirable to restrict the schedules to those that are cascadeless

25. 11.25 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Transaction Definition in SQL Data manipulation language must include a construct for specifying the set of actions that comprise a transaction In SQL, a transaction begins implicitly A transaction in SQL ends by:  Commit work commits current transaction and begins a new one  Rollback work causes current transaction to abort Levels of consistency specified by SQL-92:  Serializable — default  Repeatable read  Read committed  Read uncommitted

26. 11.26 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems 6. Example T 1 : read(A); read(B); if A = 0 then B := B+1; write(B). T 2 : read(B); read(A); if B = 0 then A := A+1; write(A). Consistency requirement: A=0 or B=0 Initial values: A=0; B=0; 1. Show that every serial execution involving T 1 and T 2 preserves the consistency of the database. 2. Show a concurrent execution of T 1 and T 2 that produces a nonserializable schedule. 3. Is there a concurrent execution of T 1 and T 2 that produces a serializable schedule?

27. 11.27 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Example (cont): serial executions

28. 11.28 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Example (cont): a non-serializable schedule

29. 11.29 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Example (cont) T1: read(A); read(B); if A = 0 then B := B+1; write(B). T2: read(B); read(A); if B = 0 then A := A+1; write(A). No concurrent execution of T 1 and T 2 produces a serializable schedule Suppose we start with T 1 read(A) When the schedule ends, regardless of when we run the steps of T 2, B=1 Before T 1 is finished we must start T 2. T 2 read(B) will give B a value of 0. When T 2 completes, A=1 At the end of execution, A=1, B=1, violating the consistency requirement

30. 11.30 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Example During execution, a transaction passes through several states, until it finally commits or aborts. List all possible sequences of states through which a transaction may pass. Explain why each state transition may occur 1. active -> partially committed -> committed Once all the transaction’s statements have been executed it enters the partially committed state, and once enough recovery information has been written to disk, the transaction enters the committed state. 2. active -> partially committed -> aborted Once all the transaction’s statements have been executed it enters the partially committed state, but before enough recovery information is written to disk there is a hardware failure. When the system is restarted, all changes made by this transaction are undone, after which the transaction enters the aborted state. 3. active -> failed -> aborted After the transaction starts it is discovered that normal execution cannot continue (e.g. an update violates an integrity constraint), so the transaction enters the failed state. It is then rolled back, after which it enters the aborted state.

31. 11.31 of 39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan Modifications & additions by Cengiz Güngör UBI 502 Database Management Systems Summary ACID  Atomicity: all operations reflected in the DB, or else none are  Consistency: Executing transaction in isolation preserves consistency  Isolation: Concurrent transactions unaware of each other  Durability: Changes made by successful transactions persist Serializability  Conflict serializability  View serializability  Testing for serializability, precedence graphs Recoverability  handling the effects of a transaction failure on running transactions  cascading rollback