Unit-5

Topics covered: Transaction concepts, properties of transactions, Serializability of

transactions, testing for serializability, System recovery, Concurrency Control, Two- Phase
Commit protocol, Recovery and Atomicity, Log-based recovery, concurrent executions of
transactions and related problems, Deadlock, Intent locking.

1.​ Transaction concepts

A transaction can be defined as a group of tasks. A single task is the minimum processing
unit which cannot be divided further.
Let’s take an example of a simple transaction. Suppose a bank employee transfers Rs 500
from A's account to B's account. This very simple and small transaction involves several
low-level tasks.

A’s Account Open_Account (B)

Old_Balance = B.balance
Open_Account (A)
New_Balance = Old_Balance + 500
Old_Balance = A.balance
B.balance = New_Balance
New_Balance = Old_Balance - 500
Close_Account (B)
A.balance = New_Balance
Close_Account (A)
B’s Account

2.​ Properties of transactions

ACID Properties
A transaction is a very small unit of a program and it may contain several low level tasks. A
transaction in a database system must maintain Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation,
and Durability − commonly known as ACID properties − in order to ensure accuracy,
completeness, and data integrity.
●​ Atomicity − this property states that a transaction must be treated as an atomic
unit, that is, either all of its operations are executed or none. There must be no state
in a database where a transaction is left partially completed. States should be
defined either before the execution of the transaction or after the
execution/abortion/failure of the transaction.
●​ Consistency − the database must remain in a consistent state after any transaction.
No transaction should have any adverse effect on the data residing in the database.
If the database was in a consistent state before the execution of a transaction, it
must remain consistent after the execution of the transaction as well.

1
 ●​ Durability − the database should be durable enough to hold all its latest updates
even if the system fails or restarts. If a transaction updates a chunk of data in a
database and commits, then the database will hold the modified data. If a
transaction commits but the system fails before the data could be written on to the
disk, then that data will be updated once the system springs back into action.
●​ Isolation − In a database system where more than one transaction are being
executed simultaneously and in parallel, the property of isolation states that all the
transactions will be carried out and executed as if it is the only transaction in the
system. No transaction will affect the existence of any other transaction.

3.​ Serializability of transactions

Serializability
When multiple transactions are being executed by the operating system in a
multiprogramming environment, there are possibilities that instructions of one
transaction are interleaved with some other transaction.
●​ Schedule − A chronological execution sequence of a transaction is called a
schedule. A schedule can have many transactions in it, each comprising of a number
of instructions/tasks.
●​ Serial Schedule − It is a schedule in which transactions are aligned in such a way
that one transaction is executed first. When the first transaction completes its cycle,
then the next transaction is executed. Transactions are ordered one after the other.
This type of schedule is called a serial schedule, as transactions are executed in a
serial manner.
In a multi-transaction environment, serial schedules are considered as a benchmark. The
execution sequence of an instruction in a transaction cannot be changed, but two
transactions can have their instructions executed in a random fashion. This execution does
no harm if two transactions are mutually independent and working on different segments
of data; but in case these two transactions are working on the same data, then the results
may vary. This ever-varying result may bring the database to an inconsistent state.
To resolve this problem, we allow parallel execution of a transaction schedule, if its
transactions are either serializable or have some equivalence relation among them.

Equivalence Schedules
An equivalence schedule can be of the following types −

Result Equivalence
If two schedules produce the same result after execution, they are said to be result
equivalent. They may yield the same result for some value and different results for another
set of values. That's why this equivalence is not generally considered significant.

2
View Equivalence
Two schedules would be view equivalence if the transactions in both the schedules
perform similar actions in a similar manner.
For example −
●​ If T reads the initial data in S1, then it also reads the initial data in S2.
●​ If T reads the value written by J in S1, then it also reads the value written by J in S2.
●​ If T performs the final write on the data value in S1, then it also performs the final
write on the data value in S2.

Conflict Equivalence
Two schedules would be conflicting if they have the following properties −

●​ Both belong to separate transactions.

●​ Both access the same data item.
●​ At least one of them is "write" operation.

Two schedules having multiple transactions with conflicting operations are said to be
conflict equivalent if and only if −

●​ Both the schedules contain the same set of Transactions.

●​ The order of conflicting pairs of operation is maintained in both the schedules.

Note − View equivalent schedules are view serializable and conflict equivalent schedules
are conflict serializable. All conflict serializable schedules are view serializable too.

States of Transactions
A transaction in a database can be in one of the following states −

3
 ●​ Active − in this state, the transaction is being executed. This is the initial state of
every transaction.
●​ Partially Committed − When a transaction executes its final operation, it is said to
be in a partially committed state.
●​ Failed − A transaction is said to be in a failed state if any of the checks made by the
database recovery system fails. A failed transaction can no longer proceed further.
●​ Aborted − If any of the checks fails and the transaction has reached a failed state,
then the recovery manager rolls back all its write operations on the database to
bring the database back to its original state where it was prior to the execution of
the transaction. Transactions in this state are called aborted. The database recovery
module can select one of the two operations after a transaction aborts −
o​ Re-start the transaction
o​ Kill the transaction
●​ Committed − If a transaction executes all its operations successfully, it is said to be
committed. All its effects are now permanently established on the database system.

4.​ Testing for serializability

Serialization Graph is used to test the Serializability of a schedule.

Assume a schedule S. For S, we construct a graph known as precedence graph. This graph
has a pair G = (V, E), where V consists a set of vertices, and E consists a set of edges. The set
of vertices is used to contain all the transactions participating in the schedule. The set of
edges is used to contain all edges Ti ->Tj for which one of the three conditions holds:

4
 1.​ Create a node Ti → Tj if Ti executes write (Q) before Tj executes read (Q).
2.​ Create a node Ti → Tj if Ti executes read (Q) before Tj executes write (Q).
3.​ Create a node Ti → Tj if Ti executes write (Q) before Tj executes write (Q).

o​ If a precedence graph contains a single edge Ti → Tj, then all the instructions of Ti
are executed before the first instruction of Tj is executed.
o​ If a precedence graph for schedule S contains a cycle, then S is non-serializable. If the
precedence graph has no cycle, then S is known as serializable.

For example:

Explanation:

5
Read(A): In T1, no subsequent writes to A, so no new edges​
Read(B): In T2, no subsequent writes to B, so no new edges​
Read(C): In T3, no subsequent writes to C, so no new edges​
Write(B): B is subsequently read by T3, so add edge T2 → T3​
Write(C): C is subsequently read by T1, so add edge T3 → T1​
Write(A): A is subsequently read by T2, so add edge T1 → T2​
Write(A): In T2, no subsequent reads to A, so no new edges​
Write(C): In T1, no subsequent reads to C, so no new edges​
Write(B): In T3, no subsequent reads to B, so no new edges

Precedence graph for schedule S1:

​

The precedence graph for schedule S1 contains a cycle that's why Schedule S1 is non-serializable.

6
Explanation:

Read(A): In T4,no subsequent writes to A, so no new edges​

Read(C): In T4, no subsequent writes to C, so no new edges​
Write(A): A is subsequently read by T5, so add edge T4 → T5​
Read(B): In T5,no subsequent writes to B, so no new edges​
Write(C): C is subsequently read by T6, so add edge T4 → T6​
Write(B): A is subsequently read by T6, so add edge T5 → T6​
Write(C): In T6, no subsequent reads to C, so no new edges​
Write(A): In T5, no subsequent reads to A, so no new edges​
Write(B): In T6, no subsequent reads to B, so no new edges

Precedence graph for schedule S2:

​

The precedence graph for schedule S2 contains no cycle that's why ScheduleS2 is serializable.

Conflict Serializable Schedule

o​ A schedule is called conflict serializability if after swapping of non-conflicting operations, it c

transform into a serial schedule.
o​ The schedule will be a conflict serializable if it is conflict equivalent to a serial schedule.

Conflicting Operations
The two operations become conflicting if all conditions satisfy:

1.​ Both belong to separate transactions.

2.​ They have the same data item.
3.​ They contain at least one write operation.

Example:
Swapping is possible only if S1 and S2 are logically equal.

7
​

​
Here, S1 = S2. That means it is non-conflict.

Here, S1 ≠ S2. That means it is conflict.

Conflict Equivalent
In the conflict equivalent, one can be transformed to another by swapping non-conflicting
operations. In the given example, S2 is conflict equivalent to S1 (S1 can be converted to S2 by
swapping non-conflicting operations).

Two schedules are said to be conflict equivalent if and only if:

1.​ They contain the same set of the transaction.
2.​ If each pair of conflict operations are ordered in the same way.

8
Example:
​

Schedule S2 is a serial schedule because, in this, all operations of T1 are performed

before starting any operation of T2. Schedule S1 can be transformed into a serial schedule
by swapping non-conflicting operations of S1.

After swapping of non-conflict operations, the schedule S1 becomes:

T1 T2

Read(A)​ ​
Write(A)​ ​
Read(B)​ ​
Write(B) ​
Read(A)​
Write(A)​
Read(B)​
Write(B)

Since, S1 is conflict serializable.

View Serializability

o​ A schedule will view serializable if it is view equivalent to a serial schedule.

o​ If a schedule is conflict serializable, then it will be view serializable.

9
 o​ The view serializable which does not conflict serializable contains blind writes.

View Equivalent
Two schedules S1 and S2 are said to be view equivalent if they satisfy the following conditions:

1. Initial Read
An initial read of both schedules must be the same. Suppose two schedule S1 and S2.
In schedule S1, if a transaction T1 is reading the data item A, then in S2, transaction
T1 should also read A.
​

​
Above two schedules are view equivalent because Initial read operation in S1 is done
by T1 and in S2 it is also done by T1.

2. Updated Read
In schedule S1, if Ti is reading A which is updated by Tj then in S2 also, Ti should read A

which is updated by Tj.

​
Above two schedules are not view equal because, in S1, T3 is reading A updated by T2

and in S2, T3 is reading A updated by T1.

3. Final Write
A final write must be the same between both the schedules. In schedule S1, if a transaction

10
T1 updates A at last then in S2, final writes operations should also be done by T1.

Above two schedules is view equal because Final write operation in S1 is done by T3 and in S2,

the final write operation is also done by T3.

Example:

Schedule S

With 3 transactions, the total number of possible schedule

= 3! = 6
S1 = <T1 T2 T3>
S2 = <T1 T3 T2>
S3 = <T2 T3 T1>
S4 = <T2 T1 T3>
S5 = <T3 T1 T2>
S6 = <T3 T2 T1>
Taking first schedule S1:

11
​

Schedule S1

Step 1: final Updation on data items

In both schedules S and S1, there is no read except the initial read that's why we don't need to

check that condition.

Step 2: Initial Read

The initial read operation in S is done by T1 and in S1, it is also done by T1.

Step 3: Final Write

The final write operation in S is done by T3 and in S1, it is also done by T3. So, S and S1 are

view Equivalent.

The first schedule S1 satisfies all three conditions, so we don't need to check another schedule.

Hence, view equivalent serial schedule is:

T1 → T2 → T3

5.​ System recovery

Recoverability of Schedule

Sometimes a transaction may not execute completely due to a software issue, system crash
or hardware failure. In that case, the failed transaction has to be rollback. But some other
transaction may also have used value produced by the failed transaction. So we also have to
rollback those transactions.

12
​

The above table 1 shows a schedule which has two transactions. T1 reads and writes the
value of A and that value is read and written by T2. T2 commits but later on, T1 fails. Due to
the failure, we have to rollback T1. T2 should also be rollback because it reads the value
written by T1, but T2 can't be rollback because it already committed. So this type of
schedule is known as irrecoverable schedule.

Irrecoverable schedule: The schedule will be irrecoverable if Tj reads the updated value
of Ti and Tj committed before Ti commit.

The above table 2 shows a schedule with two transactions. Transaction T1 reads and writes
A, and that value is read and written by transaction T2. But later on, T1 fails. Due to this, we

13
have to rollback T1. T2 should be rollback because T2 has read the value written by T1. As
it has not committed before T1 commits so we can rollback transaction T2 as well. So it is
recoverable with cascade rollback.

Recoverable with cascading rollback: The schedule will be recoverable with cascading
rollback if Tj reads the updated value of Ti. Commit of Tj is delayed till commit of Ti.

The above Table 3 shows a schedule with two transactions. Transaction T1 reads and write
A and commits, and that value is read and written by T2. So this is a cascade less
recoverable schedule.

6.​ Log-Based Recovery

●​ The log is a sequence of records. Log of each transaction is maintained in some
stable storage so that if any failure occurs, then it can be recovered from there.
●​ If any operation is performed on the database, then it will be recorded in the
log.
●​ But the process of storing the logs should be done before the actual transaction
is applied in the database.
●​ Let's assume there is a transaction to modify the City of a student. The
following logs are written for this transaction.

●​ When the transaction is initiated, then it writes 'start' log.

●​ <Tn, Start>
●​ When the transaction modifies the City from 'Noida' to 'Bangalore', then
another log is written to the file.
●​ <Tn, City, 'Noida', 'Bangalore' >

14
 ●​ When the transaction is finished, then it writes another log to indicate the end
of the transaction.
●​ <Tn, Commit>
There are two approaches to modify the database:

1. Deferred database modification:

The deferred modification technique occurs if the transaction does not modify the
database until it has committed. In this method, all the logs are created and stored in
the stable storage, and the database is updated when a transaction commits.

2. Immediate database modification:

The Immediate modification technique occurs if database modification occurs while
the transaction is still active. In this technique, the database is modified immediately
after every operation. It follows an actual database modification.

Recovery using Log records

●​ When the system is crashed, then the system consults the log to find which
transactions need to be undone and which need to be redone.

●​ If the log contains the record <Ti, Start> and <Ti, Commit> or <Ti, Commit>,
then the Transaction Ti needs to be redone.
●​ If log contains record<Tn, Start> but does not contain the record either <Ti,
commit> or <Ti, abort>, then the Transaction Ti needs to be undone.

Checkpoint

o​ The checkpoint is a type of mechanism where all the previous logs are removed from
the system and permanently stored in the storage disk.
o​ The checkpoint is like a bookmark. While the execution of the transaction, such
checkpoints are marked, and the transaction is executed then using the steps of the
transaction, the log files will be created.
o​ When it reaches to the checkpoint, then the transaction will be updated into the
database, and till that point, the entire log file will be removed from the file. Then
the log file is updated with the new step of transaction till next checkpoint and so on.
o​ The checkpoint is used to declare a point before which the DBMS was in the
consistent state, and all transactions were committed.

Recovery using Checkpoint

In the following manner, a recovery system recovers the database from this failure:

15
​

o​ The recovery system reads log files from the end to start. It reads log files from T4 to
T1.
o​ Recovery system maintains two lists, a redo-list, and an undo-list.
o​ The transaction is put into redo state if the recovery system sees a log with <Tn,
Start> and <Tn, Commit> or just <Tn, Commit>. In the redo-list and their previous
list, all the transactions are removed and then redone before saving their logs.
o​ For example: In the log file, transaction T2 and T3 will have <Tn, Start> and <Tn,
Commit>. The T1 transaction will have only <Tn, commit> in the log file. That's why
the transaction is committed after the checkpoint is crossed. Hence it puts T1, T2
and T3 transaction into redo list.
o​ The transaction is put into undo state if the recovery system sees a log with <Tn,
Start> but no commit or abort log found. In the undo-list, all the transactions are
undone, and their logs are removed.
o​ For example: Transaction T4 will have <Tn, Start>. So T4 will be put into undo list
since this transaction is not yet complete and failed amid.

7.​ Deadlock
A deadlock is a condition where two or more transactions are waiting indefinitely for one
another to give up locks. Deadlock is said to be one of the most feared complications in
DBMS as no task ever gets finished and is in waiting state forever.

For example: In the student table, transaction T1 holds a lock on some rows and needs to
update some rows in the grade table. Simultaneously, transaction T2 holds locks on some

16
rows in the grade table and needs to update the rows in the Student table held by
Transaction T1.

Now, the main problem arises. Now Transaction T1 is waiting for T2 to release its lock and
similarly, transaction T2 is waiting for T1 to release its lock. All activities come to a halt
state and remain at a standstill. It will remain in a standstill until the DBMS detects the
deadlock and aborts one of the transactions.

Deadlock Avoidance
o​ When a database is stuck in a deadlock state, then it is better to avoid the database
rather than aborting or restating the database. This is a waste of time and resource.
o​ Deadlock avoidance mechanism is used to detect any deadlock situation in advance.
A method like "wait for graph" is used for detecting the deadlock situation but this
method is suitable only for the smaller database. For the larger database, deadlock
prevention method can be used.

Deadlock Detection
In a database, when a transaction waits indefinitely to obtain a lock, then the DBMS should
detect whether the transaction is involved in a deadlock or not. The lock manager
maintains a Wait for the graph to detect the deadlock cycle in the database.

Wait for Graph

o​ This is the suitable method for deadlock detection. In this method, a graph is created
based on the transaction and their lock. If the created graph has a cycle or closed
loop, then there is a deadlock.

17
 o​ The wait for the graph is maintained by the system for every transaction which is
waiting for some data held by the others. The system keeps checking the graph if
there is any cycle in the graph.

The wait for a graph for the above scenario is shown below:

Deadlock Prevention
o​ Deadlock prevention method is suitable for a large database. If the resources are
allocated in such a way that deadlock never occurs, then the deadlock can be
prevented.
o​ The Database management system analyzes the operations of the transaction
whether they can create a deadlock situation or not. If they do, then the DBMS never
allowed that transaction to be executed.

Wait-Die scheme
In this scheme, if a transaction requests for a resource which is already held with a
conflicting lock by another transaction then the DBMS simply checks the timestamp of both
transactions. It allows the older transaction to wait until the resource is available for
execution.

Let's assume there are two transactions Ti and Tj and let TS (T) is a timestamp of any
transaction T. If T2 holds a lock by some other transaction and T1 is requesting for
resources held by T2 then the following actions are performed by DBMS:

1.​ Check if TS (Ti) < TS(Tj) - If Ti is the older transaction and Tj has held some
resource, then Ti is allowed to wait until the data-item is available for execution.
That means if the older transaction is waiting for a resource which is locked by the
younger transaction, then the older transaction is allowed to wait for resource until
it is available.

18
 2.​ Check if TS(Ti) < TS(Tj) - If Ti is older transaction and has held some resource and if
Tj is waiting for it, then Tj is killed and restarted later with the random delay but
with the same timestamp.

Wound wait scheme

o​ In wound wait scheme, if the older transaction requests for a resource which is held
by the younger transaction, then older transaction forces younger one to kill the
transaction and release the resource. After the minute delay, the younger transaction
is restarted but with the same timestamp.
o​ If the older transaction has held a resource which is requested by the Younger
transaction, then the younger transaction is asked to wait until older releases it.

8.​ Concurrency Control

Concurrency Control is the management procedure that is required for controlling
concurrent execution of the operations that take place on a database. But before knowing
about concurrency control, we should know about concurrent execution.

Concurrent Execution in DBMS

o​ In a multi-user system, multiple users can access and use the same database at one
time, which is known as the concurrent execution of the database. It means that the
same database is executed simultaneously on a multi-user system by different users.
o​ While working on the database transactions, there occurs the requirement of using
the database by multiple users for performing different operations, and in that case,
concurrent execution of the database is performed.
o​ The thing is that the simultaneous execution that is performed should be done in an
interleaved manner, and no operation should affect the other executing operations,
thus maintaining the consistency of the database. Thus, on making the concurrent
execution of the transaction operations, there occur several challenging problems
that need to be solved.

Concurrency Control
Concurrency Control is the working concept that is required for controlling and managing
the concurrent execution of database operations and thus avoiding the inconsistencies in
the database. Thus, for maintaining the concurrency of the database, we have the
concurrency control protocols.

19
Concurrency Control Protocols
The concurrency control protocols ensure the atomicity, consistency, isolation,
durability and serializability of the concurrent execution of the database transactions.
Therefore, these protocols are categorized as:

o​ Lock Based Concurrency Control Protocol

o​ Time Stamp Concurrency Control Protocol
o​ Validation Based Concurrency Control Protocol

Lock-Based Protocol

In this type of protocol, any transaction cannot read or write data until it acquires an
appropriate lock on it. There are two types of lock:

1. Shared lock:

o​ It is also known as a Read-only lock. In a shared lock, the data item can only read by
the transaction.
o​ It can be shared between the transactions because when the transaction holds a
lock, then it can't update the data on the data item.

2. Exclusive lock:

o​ In the exclusive lock, the data item can be both reads as well as written by the
transaction.
o​ This lock is exclusive, and in this lock, multiple transactions do not modify the same
data simultaneously.

There are four types of lock protocols available:

1. Simplistic lock protocol

It is the simplest way of locking the data while transaction. Simplistic lock-based protocols
allow all the transactions to get the lock on the data before insert or delete or update on it.
It will unlock the data item after completing the transaction.

2. Pre-claiming Lock Protocol

o​ Pre-claiming Lock Protocols evaluate the transaction to list all the data items on
which they need locks.
o​ Before initiating an execution of the transaction, it requests DBMS for all the lock on
all those data items.
o​ If all the locks are granted then this protocol allows the transaction to begin. When
the transaction is completed then it releases all the lock.

20
 o​ If all the locks are not granted then this protocol allows the transaction to rolls back
and waits until all the locks are granted.

3. Two-phase locking (2PL)

o​ The two-phase locking protocol divides the execution phase of the transaction into
three parts.
o​ In the first part, when the execution of the transaction starts, it seeks permission for
the lock it requires.
o​ In the second part, the transaction acquires all the locks. The third phase is started
as soon as the transaction releases its first lock.
o​ In the third phase, the transaction cannot demand any new locks. It only releases the
acquired locks.

There are two phases of 2PL:

Growing phase: In the growing phase, a new lock on the data item may be acquired by the
transaction, but none can be released.

Shrinking phase: In the shrinking phase, existing lock held by the transaction may be
released, but no new locks can be acquired.

21
In the below example, if lock conversion is allowed then the following phase can happen:

1.​ Upgrading of lock (from S (a) to X (a)) is allowed in growing phase.

2.​ Downgrading of lock (from X (a) to S(a)) must be done in shrinking phase.

Example:

The following way shows how unlocking and locking work with 2-PL.

Transaction T1:

o​ Growing phase: from step 1-3

o​ Shrinking phase: from step 5-7
o​ Lock point: at 3

Transaction T2:

o​ Growing phase: from step 2-6

o​ Shrinking phase: from step 8-9
o​ Lock point: at 6

Timestamp Ordering Protocol

22
 o​ The Timestamp Ordering Protocol is used to order the transactions based on their
Timestamps. The order of transaction is nothing but the ascending order of the
transaction creation.
o​ The priority of the older transaction is higher that's why it executes first. To
determine the timestamp of the transaction, this protocol uses system time or
logical counter.
o​ The lock-based protocol is used to manage the order between conflicting pairs
among transactions at the execution time. But Timestamp based protocols start
working as soon as a transaction is created.
o​ Let's assume there are two transactions T1 and T2. Suppose the transaction T1 has
entered the system at 007 times and transaction T2 has entered the system at 009
times. T1 has the higher priority, so it executes first as it is entered the system first.
o​ The timestamp ordering protocol also maintains the timestamp of last 'read' and
'write' operation on a data.

Basic Timestamp ordering protocol works as follows:

1. Check the following condition whenever a transaction Ti issues a Read (X) operation:

o​ If W_TS(X) >TS (Ti) then the operation is rejected.

o​ If W_TS(X) <= TS (Ti) then the operation is executed.
o​ Timestamps of all the data items are updated.

2. Check the following condition whenever a transaction Ti issues a Write(X) operation:

o​ If TS (Ti) < R_TS(X) then the operation is rejected.

o​ If TS (Ti) < W_TS(X) then the operation is rejected and Ti is rolled back otherwise
the operation is executed.

Where,

TS (TI) denotes the timestamp of the transaction Ti.

R_TS(X) denotes the Read time-stamp of data-item X.

W_TS(X) denotes the Write time-stamp of data-item X.

Advantages and Disadvantages of TO protocol:

o​ TO protocol ensures serializability since the precedence graph is as follows:

23
​

o​ TS protocol ensures freedom from deadlock that means no transaction ever waits.
o​ But the schedule may not be recoverable and may not even be cascade- free.

Validation Based Protocol

Validation phase is also known as optimistic concurrency control technique. In the

validation based protocol, the transaction is executed in the following three phases:

1.​ Read phase: In this phase, the transaction T is read and executed. It is used to read
the value of various data items and stores them in temporary local variables. It can
perform all the write operations on temporary variables without an update to the
actual database.
2.​ Validation phase: In this phase, the temporary variable value will be validated
against the actual data to see if it violates the serializability.
3.​ Write phase: If the validation of the transaction is validated, then the temporary
results are written to the database or system otherwise the transaction is rolled
back.

Here each phase has the following different timestamps:

Start (Ti): It contains the time when Ti started its execution.

Validation (Ti): It contains the time when Ti finishes its read phase and starts its validation
phase.

Finish (Ti): It contains the time when Ti finishes its write phase.

24
 o​ This protocol is used to determine the time stamp for the transaction for
serialization using the time stamp of the validation phase, as it is the actual phase
which determines if the transaction will commit or rollback.
o​ Hence TS (T) = validation(T).
o​ The serializability is determined during the validation process. It can't be decided in
advance.
o​ While executing the transaction, it ensures a greater degree of concurrency and also
less number of conflicts.
o​ Thus it contains transactions which have less number of rollbacks.

9.​ Two- Phase Commit protocol

A two-phase commit is a standardized protocol that ensures that a database commit is
implementing in the situation where a commit operation must be broken into two separate
parts. In database management, saving data changes is known as a commit and undoing
changes is known as a rollback. Both can be achieved easily using transaction logging when
a single server is involved, but when the data is spread across geographically-diverse
servers in distributed computing (i.e., each server being an independent entity with
separate log records), the process can become more tricky.

The two-phase commit is implemented as follows:

Phase 1 - Each server that needs to commit data writes its data records to the log. If a
server is unsuccessful, it responds with a failure message. If successful, the server replies
with an OK message.

Phase 2 - This phase begins after all participants respond OK. Then, the coordinator sends
a signal to each server with commit instructions. After committing, each writes the commit
as part of its log record for reference and sends the coordinator a message that its commit
has been successfully implemented. If a server fails, the coordinator sends instructions to
all servers to roll back the transaction. After the servers roll back, each sends feedback that
this has been completed.

10.​Concurrent executions of transactions and related problems

Problems with Concurrent Execution
In a database transaction, the two main operations are READ and WRITE operations. So,
there is a need to manage these two operations in the concurrent execution of the

25
transactions as if these operations are not performed in an interleaved manner, and the
data may become inconsistent. So, the following problems occur with the Concurrent
Execution of the operations:

Problem 1: Lost Update Problems (W - W Conflict)

The problem occurs when two different database transactions perform the read/write
operations on the same database items in an interleaved manner (i.e., concurrent
execution) that makes the values of the items incorrect hence making the database
inconsistent.

For example:

Consider the below diagram where two transactions TX and TY, are performed on the
same account A where the balance of account A is $300.

o​ At time t1, transaction TX reads the value of account A, i.e., $300 (only read).
o​ At time t2, transaction TX deducts $50 from account A that becomes $250 (only
deducted and not updated/write).
o​ Alternately, at time t3, transaction TY reads the value of account A that will be $300
only because TX didn't update the value yet.

26
 o​ At time t4, transaction TY adds $100 to account A that becomes $400 (only added
but not updated/write).
o​ At time t6, transaction TX writes the value of account A that will be updated as $250
only, as TY didn't update the value yet.
o​ Similarly, at time t7, transaction TY writes the values of account A, so it will write as
done at time t4 that will be $400. It means the value written by TX is lost, i.e., $250 is
lost.

Hence data becomes incorrect, and database sets to inconsistent.

Dirty Read Problems (W-R Conflict)

The dirty read problem occurs when one transaction updates an item of the database, and
somehow the transaction fails, and before the data gets rollback, the updated database item
is accessed by another transaction. There comes the Read-Write Conflict between both
transactions.

For example:

Consider two transactions TX and TY in the below diagram performing read/write

operations on account A where the available balance in account A is $300:

o​ At time t1, transaction TX reads the value of account A, i.e., $300.

o​ At time t2, transaction TX adds $50 to account A that becomes $350.

27
 o​ At time t3, transaction TX writes the updated value in account A, i.e., $350.
o​ Then at time t4, transaction TY reads account A that will be read as $350.
o​ Then at time t5, transaction TX rollbacks due to server problem, and the value
changes back to $300 (as initially).
o​ But the value for account A remains $350 for transaction TY as committed, which is
the dirty read and therefore known as the Dirty Read Problem.

Unrepeatable Read Problem (W-R Conflict)

Also known as Inconsistent Retrievals Problem that occurs when in a transaction, two
different values are read for the same database item.

For example:

Consider two transactions, TX and TY, performing the read/write operations on

account A, having an available balance = $300. The diagram is shown below:

o​ At time t1, transaction TX reads the value from account A, i.e., $300.
o​ At time t2, transaction TY reads the value from account A, i.e., $300.
o​ At time t3, transaction TY updates the value of account A by adding $100 to the
available balance, and then it becomes $400.
o​ At time t4, transaction TY writes the updated value, i.e., $400.
o​ After that, at time t5, transaction TX reads the available value of account A, and that
will be read as $400.

28
 o​ It means that within the same transaction TX, it reads two different values of account
A, i.e., $ 300 initially, and after Updation made by transaction TY, it reads $400. It is
an unrepeatable read and is therefore known as the Unrepeatable read problem.

Thus, in order to maintain consistency in the database and avoid such problems that take
place in concurrent execution, management is needed, and that is where the concept of
Concurrency Control comes into role.

11.​Intent locking (Explained above in detail)

An intent lock indicates that SQL Server wants to acquire a shared (S) lock or
exclusive (X) lock on some of the resources lower down in the hierarchy. For
example, a shared intent lock placed at the table level means that a transaction
intends on placing shared (S) locks on pages or rows within that table.

29