1. Distributed Systems 2006 Styles of Client/Server Computing

2. Distributed Systems 20062 Plan Styles Examples –Distributed file systems –Databases

3. Distributed Systems 20063 Basic Client/Server Properties Often little communication among clients Client to server ratio often high –Need for caching to achieve performance Access objects Access files Access relations

4. Distributed Systems 20064 Caching Storing shared state at both client and server –Requests may be handled locally State may become out-of- date if updated outside cache –Stale vs consistent Coherent caching –Guarantees that cache is not stale

5. Distributed Systems 20065 Stateless and Stateful Stateless architectures –Server does not track clients or ensure that cached data is up-to-date; clients independently responsible –Server may change state without notifying clients; thus shared state may become stale – caches as hints –May take load off server, simplifies error recovery –Distributed file systems Stateful architectures –Client make take actions, assuming that local state is correct –Servers typically need to track clients –Mimic behavior of non-replicated/- shared data – often locking of data –Transactional databases

6. Distributed Systems 20066 Distributed File Systems Two major stateless examples –Sun NFS on Unix/Linux/... –Windows NTFS Emulate local file access interface –File access on remote server using RPC –Caching to improve performance

7. Distributed Systems 20067 Sun NFS Developed by Sun in the 1980’s to provide a file system for diskless clients –NFS Version 4 (2000) introduces part state as in NTFS...

8. Distributed Systems 20068 Unix File Systems Virtual file system allows the use of many actual file systems Unix files are described using inodes –Contain mode, ownership information, time stamps, addresses of actual file blocks,... A directory is a file containing list of names and inodes Commands –E.g., mount, create, open, read, write

9. Distributed Systems 20069 NFS Operations RPC is not reliable, retry until success Mount –Client issues mount RPC request –Server checks request for validity. Is file available and is user allowed to access? –Server returns handle –Client stores in remote mount table Create, open –Client file system sees that path maps to remotely mounted file system, sends request to server –Server takes action, returns virtualized inode, vnode –Example of reliability problems: Create/delete used to create lock files vs timeouts Read, write –Uses vnodes –Cache vnodes and subset of blocks of files Freshness interval during which no cache validation is made Otherwise validation based on timestamps of files –Write-through cache policy Client applications see own modifications, modifications written back to server eventually Another source of problems: Even though cache is validated at client, server does not see complete state

10. Distributed Systems 200610 Real-World File Access? [Baker et al., 1991]: Study of file access patterns –All file access is sequential –Little sharing of files between applications – one application creates, other application reads –Files are either very short-lived or very long-lived Stateful distributed file systems –Andrew File System –Sprite file system –CODA –XFR

11. Distributed Systems 200611 Transactional Databases Assumptions –All stateful interaction client server –Interaction through short sequences of begin -> {read, update}* ->{commit, abort} issued at clients Structure interaction in transactions –Statefulness E.g., data read and written during transactions, ongoing transaction shared state 80% of all reliable distributed computing is based on transactions –Just like 80% of all programming is done in Visual Basic –In this course, transactions is just one reliability technique

12. Distributed Systems 200612 Properties of Transactions The basic unit of interaction with a database server Guaranteed properties (ACID) –Atomicity Each transaction is executed to completion or not at all Rollbacks may be necessary –Concurrency Transactions are minimized so as to maximize concurrency –Independence/Isolation Transactions execute independently on each other Effects of interactions do not interleave –Durability Results of committed transactions are persistent

13. Distributed Systems 200613 Serializability Isolation of concurrent transactions –Makes it easier to program database applications T1 and T2 executed concurrently/interleaved, effects will be as –T1 executed, then T2 executed, or –T2 executed, then T1 executed Simple, but slow approach: –Run transactions serially, i.e., no interleaving... The point here is that database server may optimize based on interleaved scheduling of transcation steps!

14. Distributed Systems 200614 Lost Update T1 –salary1 = doctor1.getSalary() –doctor1.setSalary(salary1 + bonus) –salary2 = doctor2.getSalary() –doctor2.setSalary(salary2 - bonus) T2 –salary1 = doctor1.getSalary() –doctor1.setSalary(salary1 + bonus) –salary3 = doctor3.getSalary() –doctor3.setSalary(salary3 - bonus)

15. Distributed Systems 200615 A Serializable Transaction Interleaving T1 –salary1 = doctor1.getSalary() –doctor1.setSalary(salary1 + bonus) –salary2 = doctor2.getSalary() –doctor2.setSalary(salary2 - bonus) T2 –salary1 = doctor1.getSalary() –doctor1.setSalary(salary1 + bonus) –salary3 = doctor3.getSalary() –doctor3.setSalary(salary3 - bonus)

16. Distributed Systems 200616 Inconsistent Retrievals T1 –ward1.discharge(patient) –ward2.admit(patient) T2 –sum += ward1.getNoPatients() –sum += ward2.getNoPatients()

17. Distributed Systems 200617 Achieving Serializability Avoiding conflicts –Result of T1.a.read and T2.a.write depends on order of execution –Result of T1.a.write and T2.a.write depends on order of execution For all a, if access to a is in conflict: –T1 needs to make all accesses to a before T2 accesses a Or vice versa

18. Distributed Systems 200618 Concurrency Control Locking (1) –Use read/write locks on objects that are accessed Read locks non-exclusive Write locks exclusive –Take these locks before objects are accessed Optimistic –Operate on tentative version of objects –Check with overlapping transactions just before commit whether there is a potential conflict on an object –If so, abort; otherwise commit Time-stamped –Timestamp transactions uniquely –Validate operations, e.g., Write allowed on an object only if read and written last by earlier transaction Read allowed on an object only if written last by earlier transaction

19. Distributed Systems 200619 Deadlock T1 –ward1.discharge(patient1) –ward2.admit(patient1) T2 –ward2.discharge(patient2) –ward1.admit(patient2) Locking (2)

20. Distributed Systems 200620 Avoiding Deadlocks Deadlock prevention –E.g., requesting locks in a predefined order Deadlock detection –Cycles in wait-for graph Timeout

21. Distributed Systems 200621 Ensuring Serializability Two-phase locking –Growing phase During transaction –Acquire write lock on object if it will update –Acquire read lock on object if it will only read –Don’t release! –Shrinking phase At abort/commit –Release locks when aborted or when updates are persistent Serializability? –Order of conflicting updates cannot change Reads commute If T2 updates an object after T1 has read or updated, T2 will have to wait If T2 reads an object after T1 has updated, T2 will have to wait

22. Distributed Systems 200622 Two-Phase Locking Example T1 –salary1 = doctor1.getSalary() –doctor1.setSalary(salary1 + bonus) –salary2 = doctor2.getSalary() –doctor2.setSalary(salary2 - bonus) T2 –salary1 = doctor1.getSalary() –doctor1.setSalary(salary1 + bonus) –salary3 = doctor3.getSalary() –doctor3.setSalary(salary3 - bonus)

23. Distributed Systems 200623 Summary Stateful and stateless client/server systems –Both use caching, difference is in whether it is coherent or not NFT as example of stateless system Databases as example of stateful system