| Ensuring consistency in long running transactions |
| Full text |
Pdf
(275 KB)
|
Source
|
Automated Software Engineering
archive
Proceedings of the twenty-second IEEE/ACM international conference on Automated software engineering
table of contents
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
SESSION: Fault tolerance
table of contents
Pages 54-63
Year of Publication: 2007
ISBN:978-1-59593-882-4
|
|
Authors
|
|
| Sponsors |
|
| Publisher |
|
| Bibliometrics |
Downloads (6 Weeks): 8, Downloads (12 Months): 91, Citation Count: 0
|
|
|
ABSTRACT
Flow composition languages permit the construction of long-running transactions from collections of independent atomic services. Due to environmental limitations, such transactions usually cannot be made to conform to standard ACID semantics. We propose set consistency, a powerful, yet intuitive, notion of consistency for long-running transactions. Set consistency considers the collection of permanent (non-intermittent) changes made by a process, when viewed at the end of its execution. Consistency requirements for such collections of changes are specified as predicates over the atomic actions of a process. Set consistency generalizes self-cancellation, a standard consistency requirement for long-running transactions, where failed processes are responsible for undoing any partially completed work. Set consistency can also express strictly stronger requirements, such as mutual exclusion or dependency. We show that the set consistency verification problem for processes is co-NP complete and present an algorithm for verifying set consistency by reduction to propositional validity. We have implemented this algorithm and demonstrate the value and tractability of our approach on three real-world case studies. In each case, the consistency requirements can be verified within a second, demonstrating the practicality of our approach.
REFERENCES
Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.
| |
1
|
Business process modeling language (BPML). http://www.bpmi.org.
|
| |
2
|
Web services conversation language (WSCL) 1.0. http://www.w3.org/TR/wscl10.
|
 |
3
|
|
| |
4
|
Roberto Bruni , Michael Butler , Carla Ferreira , Tony Hoare , Hernán Melgratti , Ugo Montanari, Comparing two approaches to compensable flow composition, CONCUR 2005 - Concurrency Theory, Springer-Verlag, London, 2005
[doi> 10.1007/11539452_30]
|
 |
5
|
Roberto Bruni , Hernán Melgratti , Ugo Montanari, Theoretical foundations for compensations in flow composition languages, Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.209-220, January 12-14, 2005, Long Beach, California, USA
|
 |
6
|
|
| |
7
|
|
| |
8
|
M. Butler and C. Ferreira. An operational semantics for StAC, a language for modelling long-running business transactions. In Coordination '04, volume 2949 of LNCS, pages 87--104. Springer, 2004.
|
| |
9
|
M. Butler, C. A. R. Hoare, and C. Ferreira. A trace semantics for long-running transactions. In Communicating Sequential Processes: The First 25 Years, volume 3525/2005 of LNCS, pages 133--150. Springer, 2004.
|
| |
10
|
NEen and NSörensson. An extensible SAT-solver. In SAT '03, pages 502--518, 2003.
|
| |
11
|
|
| |
12
|
M. Emmi and R. Majumdar. Verifying compensating transactions. In VMCAI '07. Springer, 2007.
|
| |
13
|
T. Andrews et al. Business process execution language for web services, May 2003. http://dev2dev.bea.com/webservices/BPEL4WS.html.
|
| |
14
|
H. Foster, S. Uchitel, J. Magee, and J. Kramer. Model-based verification of web service compositions. In ASE '03. IEEE, 2003.
|
 |
15
|
|
 |
16
|
|
| |
17
|
|
| |
18
|
|
| |
19
|
J. Augusto, M. Leuschel, M. Butler, and C. Ferreira. Using the extensible model checker XTL to verify StAC business specifications. In AVoCS '03, 2003.
|
 |
20
|
|
| |
21
|
Inderjeet Singh , Sean Brydon , Greg Murray , Vijay Ramachandran , Thierry Violleau , Beth Stearns, Designing Web Services with the J2EE 1.4 Platform: JAX-RPC, XML Services, and Clients, Pearson Education, 2004
|
 |
22
|
|
 |
23
|
|
|