Chapter

Introduction to Transaction Processing

Concepts and Theory
 Chapter Outline

1 Introduction to Transaction Processing

2 Transaction and System Concepts
3 Desirable Properties of Transactions
4 Characterizing Schedules based on Recoverability
5 Characterizing Schedules based on Serializability
6 Transaction Support in SQL
 1 Introduction to Transaction Processing (1)

l Single-User System: At most one user at a time can

use the system.
l Multiuser System: Many users can access the system
concurrently.
l Concurrency
– Interleaved processing: concurrent execution of
processes is interleaved in a single CPU
– Parallel processing: processes are concurrently
executed in multiple CPUs.
 Introduction to Transaction Processing (2)
l A Transaction: logical unit of database processing that
includes one or more access operations (read -retrieval,
write - insert or update, delete).
l A transaction (set of operations) may be stand-
alone specified in a high level language like SQL
submitted interactively, or may be embedded within a
program.
l Transaction boundaries: Begin and End transaction.
l An application program may contain several
transactions separated by the Begin and End
transaction boundaries.
Introduction to Transaction Processing (3)

l Basic operations are read and write

– read_item(X): Reads a database item named X into a
program variable. To simplify our notation, we assume
that the program variable is also named X.

– write_item(X): Writes the value of program variable X

into the database item named X.
 Introduction to Transaction Processing (4)

READ AND WRITE OPERATIONS:

l Basic unit of data transfer from the disk to the computer main
memory is one block. In general, a data item (what is read or
written) will be the field of some record in the database,
although it may be a larger unit such as a record or even a
whole block.

l read_item(X) command includes the following steps:

1. Find the address of the disk block that contains item X.
2. Copy that disk block into a buffer in main memory (if that disk block
is not already in some main memory buffer).
3. Copy item X from the buffer to the program variable named X.
 Introduction to Transaction Processing (5)

READ AND WRITE OPERATIONS (cont.):

l write_item(X) command includes the following steps:

1. Find the address of the disk block that contains item X.
2. Copy that disk block into a buffer in main memory (if that
disk block is not already in some main memory buffer).
3. Copy item X from the program variable named X into its
correct location in the buffer.
4. Store the updated block from the buffer back to disk (either
immediately or at some later point in time).
 FIGURE
Two sample transactions. (a) Transaction T1.
(b) Transaction T2.
 Introduction to Transaction Processing (7)
Why Concurrency Control is needed:
l The Lost Update Problem.
This occurs when two transactions that access the same
database items have their operations interleaved in a way
that makes the value of some database item incorrect.

l The Temporary Update (or Dirty Read) Problem.

This occurs when one transaction updates a database item
and then the transaction fails for some reason. The updated
item is accessed by another transaction before it is changed
back to its original value.
 Introduction to Transaction Processing (8)

Why Concurrency Control is needed (cont.):

l The Incorrect Summary Problem .

If one transaction is calculating an aggregate summary
function on a number of records while other transactions
are updating some of these records, the aggregate function
may calculate some values before they are updated and
others after they are updated.
 FIGURE
Some problems that occur when concurrent
execution is uncontrolled. (a) The lost update
problem.
 FIGURE (continued)
Some problems that occur when concurrent
execution is uncontrolled. (b) The temporary update
problem.
 FIGURE (continued)
Some problems that occur when concurrent execution is
uncontrolled. (c) The incorrect summary problem.
Introduction to Transaction Processing (11)
Why recovery is needed:
(What causes a Transaction to fail)
1. A computer failure (system crash): A hardware or software
error occurs in the computer system during transaction
execution. If the hardware crashes, the contents of the
computer’s internal memory may be lost.
2. A transaction or system error : Some operation in the
transaction may cause it to fail, such as integer overflow or
division by zero. Transaction failure may also occur because
of erroneous parameter values or because of a logical
programming error. In addition, the user may interrupt the
transaction during its execution.
Introduction to Transaction Processing (12)
Why recovery is needed (cont.):
3. Local errors or exception conditions detected by the
transaction:
- certain conditions necessitate cancellation of the transaction.
For example, data for the transaction may not be found. A
condition, such as insufficient account balance in a banking
database, may cause a transaction, such as a fund withdrawal
from that account, to be canceled.
- a programmed abort in the transaction causes it to fail.
4. Concurrency control enforcement: The concurrency control
method may decide to abort the transaction, to be restarted
later, because it violates serializability or because several
transactions are in a state of deadlock.
Introduction to Transaction Processing (13)

Why recovery is needed (cont.):

5. Disk failure: Some disk blocks may lose their data because
of a read or write malfunction or because of a disk
read/write head crash. This may happen during a read or a
write operation of the transaction.
6. Physical problems and catastrophes: This refers to an
endless list of problems that includes power or air-
conditioning failure, fire, theft, sabotage, overwriting disks
or tapes by mistake, and mounting of a wrong tape by the
operator.
 2 Transaction and System Concepts (1)

A transaction is an atomic unit of work that is either

completed in its entirety or not done at all. For recovery
purposes, the system needs to keep track of when the
transaction starts, terminates, and commits or aborts.
Transaction states:
l Active state
l Partially committed state
l Committed state
l Failed state
l Terminated State
 Transaction and System Concepts (2)
Recovery manager keeps track of the following operations:

l begin_transaction: This marks the beginning of transaction

execution.
l read or write: These specify read or write operations on the
database items that are executed as part of a transaction.
l end_transaction: This specifies that read and write
transaction operations have ended and marks the end limit of
transaction execution. At this point it may be necessary to
check whether the changes introduced by the transaction can
be permanently applied to the database or whether the
transaction has to be aborted because it violates concurrency
control or for some other reason.
 Transaction and System Concepts (3)

l commit_transaction: This signals a successful end of the

transaction so that any changes (updates) executed by
the transaction can be safely committed to the database
and will not be undone.

l rollback (or abort): This signals that the transaction has

ended unsuccessfully, so that any changes or effects that
the transaction may have applied to the database must
be undone.
 Transaction and System Concepts (4)

Recovery techniques use the following operators:

l undo: Similar to rollback except that it applies

to a single operation rather than to a whole
transaction.

l redo: This specifies that certain transaction

operations must be redone to ensure that all the
operations of a committed transaction have been
applied successfully to the database.
 FIGURE
State transition diagram illustrating the states for
transaction execution.
 Transaction and System Concepts (6)

The System Log

l Log or Journal : The log keeps track of all transaction
operations that affect the values of database items. This
information may be needed to permit recovery from
transaction failures. The log is kept on disk, so it is not
affected by any type of failure except for disk or
catastrophic failure. In addition, the log is periodically
backed up to archival storage (tape) to guard against
such catastrophic failures.
l T in the following discussion refers to a unique
transaction-id that is generated automatically by the
system and is used to identify each transaction:
 Transaction and System Concepts (7)
The System Log (cont):
Types of log record:
1. [start_transaction, T]: Records that transaction T has
started execution.
2. [write_item,T,X,old_value,new_value]: Records that
transaction T has changed the value of database item X
from old_value to new_value.
3. [read_item,T,X]: Records that transaction T has read
the value of database item X.
4. [commit,T]: Records that transaction T has completed
successfully, and affirms that its effect can be
committed (recorded permanently) to the database.
5. [abort,T]: Records that transaction T has been aborted.
 Transaction and System Concepts (8)
The System Log (cont):

l protocols for recovery that avoid cascading

rollbacks do not require that read operations
be written to the system log, whereas other
protocols require these entries for recovery.

l Strict protocols require simpler write entries

that do not include new_value.
 Transaction and System Concepts (9)
Recovery using log records:
If the system crashes, we can recover to a consistent
database state by examining the log.
1. Because the log contains a record of every write
operation that changes the value of some database
item, it is possible to undo the effect of these write
operations of a transaction T by tracing backward
through the log and resetting all items changed by a
write operation of T to their old_values.
2. We can also redo the effect of the write operations of a
transaction T by tracing forward through the log and
setting all items changed by a write operation of T
(that did not get done permanently) to their
new_values.
 Transaction and System Concepts (10)
Commit Point of a Transaction:
l Definition: A transaction T reaches its commit point
when all its operations that access the database have
been executed successfully and the effect of all the
transaction operations on the database has been
recorded in the log. Beyond the commit point, the
transaction is said to be committed, and its effect is
assumed to be permanently recorded in the database.
The transaction then writes an entry [commit,T] into
the log.
l Roll Back of transactions: Needed for transactions
that have a [start_transaction,T] entry into the log but
no commit entry [commit,T] into the log.
 Transaction and System Concepts (11)
Commit Point of a Transaction (cont):
l Redoing transactions: Transactions that have written
their commit entry in the log must also have recorded
all their write operations in the log; otherwise they
would not be committed, so their effect on the
database can be redone from the log entries. (Notice
that the log file must be kept on disk. At the time of a
system crash, only the log entries that have been
written back to disk are considered in the recovery
process because the contents of main memory may be
lost.)
l Force writing a log: before a transaction reaches its
commit point, any portion of the log that has not been
written to the disk yet must now be written to the disk.
This process is called force-writing the log file before
committing a transaction.
 3 Desirable Properties of Transactions (1)

ACID properties:

l Atomicity: A transaction is an atomic unit of

processing; it is either performed in its entirety
or not performed at all.

l Consistency preservation: A correct execution

of the transaction must take the database from
one consistent state to another.
 Desirable Properties of Transactions (2)
ACID properties (cont.):
l Isolation: A transaction should not make its updates
visible to other transactions until it is committed; this
property, when enforced strictly, solves the temporary
update problem and makes cascading rollbacks of
transactions unnecessary.

l Durability or permanency: Once a transaction changes

the database and the changes are committed, these
changes must never be lost because of subsequent
failure.
 4 Characterizing Schedules based
on Recoverability (1)
l Transaction schedule or history: When transactions are
executing concurrently in an interleaved fashion, the order of
execution of operations from the various transactions forms
what is known as a transaction schedule (or history).

l A schedule (or history) S of n transactions T1, T2, ..., Tn :

It is an ordering of the operations of the transactions subject to
the constraint that, for each transaction Ti that participates in
S, the operations of T1 in S must appear in the same order in
which they occur in T1. Note, however, that operations from
other transactions Tj can be interleaved with the operations of
Ti in S.
 Characterizing Schedules based on
Recoverability (2)
Schedules classified on recoverability:
l Recoverable schedule: One where no transaction needs
to be rolled back.
A schedule S is recoverable if no transaction T in S commits
until all transactions T’ that have written an item that T reads
have committed.

l Cascadeless schedule: One where every transaction reads

only the items that are written by committed transactions.
 Characterizing Schedules based on
Recoverability (3)
Schedules classified on recoverability (cont.):

l Strict Schedules: A schedule in which a transaction

can neither read or write an item X until the last
transaction that wrote X has committed.
 5 Characterizing Schedules based
on Serializability (1)
l Serial schedule: A schedule S is serial if, for every
transaction T participating in the schedule, all the
operations of T are executed consecutively in the
schedule. Otherwise, the schedule is called nonserial
schedule.

l Serializable schedule: A schedule S is serializable

if it is equivalent to some serial schedule of the same
n transactions.
 Characterizing Schedules based on
Serializability (2)
l Result equivalent: Two schedules are called result
equivalent if they produce the same final state of the
database.
l Conflict equivalent: Two schedules are said to be
conflict equivalent if the order of any two conflicting
operations is the same in both schedules.
l Conflict serializable: A schedule S is said to be
conflict serializable if it is conflict equivalent to
some serial schedule S’.
 Characterizing Schedules based on
Serializability (3)
l Being serializable is not the same as being serial

l Being serializable implies that the schedule is a

correct schedule.
– It will leave the database in a consistent state.
– The interleaving is appropriate and will result in a
state as if the transactions were serially executed, yet
will achieve efficiency due to concurrent execution.
 Characterizing Schedules based on
Serializability (4)

lSerializability is hard to check.

– Interleaving of operations occurs in an operating
system through some scheduler
– Difficult to determine beforehand how the
operations in a schedule will be interleaved.
 Characterizing Schedules based on
Serializability (5)
Practical approach:
l Come up with methods (protocols) to ensure
serializability.
l It’s not possible to determine when a schedule begins
and when it ends. Hence, we reduce the problem of
checking the whole schedule to checking only a
committed project of the schedule (i.e. operations
from only the committed transactions.)
l Current approach used in most DBMSs:
– Use of locks with two phase locking
 Characterizing Schedules based on
Serializability (6)
l View equivalence: A less restrictive definition of
equivalence of schedules

l View serializability: definition of serializability

based on view equivalence. A schedule is view
serializable if it is view equivalent to a serial
schedule.
 Characterizing Schedules based on
Serializability (7)
Two schedules are said to be view equivalent if the following
three conditions hold:
1. The same set of transactions participates in S and S’, and S
and S’ include the same operations of those transactions.
2. For any operation Ri(X) of Ti in S, if the value of X read by
the operation has been written by an operation Wj(X) of Tj
(or if it is the original value of X before the schedule started),
the same condition must hold for the value of X read by
operation Ri(X) of Ti in S’.
3. If the operation Wk(Y) of Tk is the last operation to write
item Y in S, then Wk(Y) of Tk must also be the last operation
to write item Y in S’.
 Characterizing Schedules based on
Serializability (8)
The premise behind view equivalence:
l As long as each read operation of a transaction reads
the result of the same write operation in both
schedules, the write operations of each transaction
musr produce the same results.
l “The view”: the read operations are said to see the
the same view in both schedules.
 Characterizing Schedules based on
Serializability (9)
Relationship between view and conflict equivalence:
l The two are same under constrained write
assumption which assumes that if T writes X, it is
constrained by the value of X it read; i.e., new X =
f(old X)
l Conflict serializability is stricter than view
serializability. With unconstrained write (or blind
write), a schedule that is view serializable is not
necessarily conflict serialiable.
l Any conflict serializable schedule is also view
serializable, but not vice versa.
 Characterizing Schedules based on
Serializability (10)
Relationship between view and conflict equivalence
(cont):
Consider the following schedule of three transactions
T1: r1(X), w1(X); T2: w2(X); and T3: w3(X):
Schedule Sa: r1(X); w2(X); w1(X); w3(X); c1; c2; c3;

In Sa, the operations w2(X) and w3(X) are blind writes, since T1
and T3 do not read the value of X.

Sa is view serializable, since it is view equivalent to the serial

schedule T1, T2, T3. However, Sa is not conflict serializable,
since it is not conflict equivalent to any serial schedule.
 Characterizing Schedules based on
Serializability (11)
Testing for conflict serializability
Algorithm 17.1:
1. Looks at only read_Item (X) and write_Item (X) operations
2. Constructs a precedence graph (serialization graph) - a graph
with directed edges
3. An edge is created from Ti to Tj if one of the operations in Ti
appears before a conflicting operation in Tj
4. The schedule is serializable if and only if the precedence graph
has no cycles.
 FIGURE
Constructing the precedence graphs for schedules A and D from
Figure 17.5 to test for conflict serializability. (a) Precedence graph for
serial schedule A. (b) Precedence graph for serial schedule B. (c)
Precedence graph for schedule C (not serializable). (d) Precedence
graph for schedule D (serializable, equivalent to schedule A).
 FIGURE
Another example of serializability testing. (a) The
READ and WRITE operations of three transactions
T1, T2, and T3.
 FIGURE (continued)
Another example of serializability testing. (b) Schedule E.
 FIGURE (continued)
Another example of serializability testing. (c) Schedule F.
 Characterizing Schedules based on
Serializability (14)
Other Types of Equivalence of Schedules
l Under special semantic constraints, schedules that
are otherwise not conflict serializable may work
correctly. Using commutative operations of addition
and subtraction (which can be done in any order)
certain non-serializable transactions may work
correctly
 Characterizing Schedules based on
Serializability (15)
Other Types of Equivalence of Schedules (cont.)
Example: bank credit / debit transactions on a given item are
separable and commutative.
Consider the following schedule S for the two transactions:
Sh : r1(X); w1(X); r2(Y); w2(Y); r1(Y); w1(Y); r2(X); w2(X);
Using conflict serializability, it is not serializable.
However, if it came from a (read,update, write) sequence as
follows:
r1(X); X := X – 10; w1(X); r2(Y); Y := Y – 20;r1(Y);
Y := Y + 10; w1(Y); r2(X); X := X + 20; (X);
Sequence explanation: debit, debit, credit, credit.
It is a correct schedule for the given semantics
 6 Transaction Support in SQL2 (1)

l A single SQL statement is always considered to

be atomic. Either the statement completes
execution without error or it fails and leaves the
database unchanged.
l With SQL, there is no explicit Begin Transaction
statement. Transaction initiation is done
implicitly when particular SQL statements are
encountered.
l Every transaction must have an explicit end
statement, which is either a COMMIT or
ROLLBACK.
 Transaction Support in SQL2 (2)

Characteristics specified by a SET

TRANSACTION statement in SQL2:
l Access mode: READ ONLY or READ WRITE. The
default is READ WRITE unless the isolation level of
READ UNCOMITTED is specified, in which case
READ ONLY is assumed.
l Diagnostic size n, specifies an integer value n,
indicating the number of conditions that can be held
simultaneously in the diagnostic area. (Supply user
feedback information)
 Transaction Support in SQL2 (3)

Characteristics specified by a SET

TRANSACTION statement in SQL2 (cont.):
l Isolation level <isolation>, where <isolation> can be
READ UNCOMMITTED, READ COMMITTED,
REPEATABLE READ or SERIALIZABLE. The
default is SERIALIZABLE.
With SERIALIZABLE: the interleaved execution of
transactions will adhere to our notion of
serializability. However, if any transaction executes
at a lower level, then serializability may be violated.
 Transaction Support in SQL2 (4)
Potential problem with lower isolation levels:
l Dirty Read: Reading a value that was written by a
transaction which failed.
l Nonrepeatable Read: Allowing another transaction to
write a new value between multiple reads of one
transaction.
A transaction T1 may read a given value from a table.
If another transaction T2 later updates that value and
T1 reads that value again, T1 will see a different value.
Consider that T1 reads the employee salary for Smith.
Next, T2 updates the salary for Smith. If T1 reads
Smith's salary again, then it will see a different value for
Smith's salary.
 Transaction Support in SQL2 (5)

Potential problem with lower isolation levels

(cont.):
l Phantoms: New rows being read using the same read
with a condition.
A transaction T1 may read a set of rows from a
table, perhaps based on some condition specified
in the SQL WHERE clause. Now suppose that a
transaction T2 inserts a new row that also satisfies
the WHERE clause condition of T1, into the table
used by T1. If T1 is repeated, then T1 will see a row
that previously did not exist, called a phantom.
 Transaction Support in SQL2 (6)
Sample SQL transaction:
EXEC SQL whenever sqlerror go to UNDO;
EXEC SQL SET TRANSACTION
READ WRITE
DIAGNOSTICS SIZE 5
ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE;
EXEC SQL INSERT
INTO EMPLOYEE (FNAME, LNAME, SSN, DNO, SALARY)
VALUES ('Robert','Smith','991004321',2,35000);
EXEC SQL UPDATE EMPLOYEE
SET SALARY = SALARY * 1.1
WHERE DNO = 2;
EXEC SQL COMMIT;
GOTO THE_END;
UNDO: EXEC SQL ROLLBACK;
THE_END: ...
 Transaction Support in SQL2 (7)
Possible violation of serializabilty:

Type of Violation
___________________________________
Isolation Dirty nonrepeatable
level read read phantom
_____________________ _____ _________ ____________________
READ UNCOMMITTED yes yes yes
READ COMMITTED no yes yes
REPEATABLE READ no no yes
SERIALIZABLE no no no