DBMS 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

• 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.
• 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.
• 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.

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 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.
 • At time t1, transaction TX reads the value of account A, i.e., $300 (only read).
• At time t2, transaction TX deducts $50 from account A that becomes $250 (only
deducted and not updated/write).
• 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.
• At time t4, transaction TY adds $100 to account A that becomes $400 (only added but
not updated/write).
• 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.
• 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:
 • At time t1, transaction TX reads the value of account A, i.e., $300.
• At time t2, transaction TX adds $50 to account A that becomes $350.
• At time t3, transaction TX writes the updated value in account A, i.e., $350.
• Then at time t4, transaction TY reads account A that will be read as $350.
• Then at time t5, transaction TX rollbacks due to server problem, and the value
changes back to $300 (as initially).
• But the value for account A remains $350 for transaction T Y 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:
 • At time t1, transaction TX reads the value from account A, i.e., $300.
• At time t2, transaction TY reads the value from account A, i.e., $300.
• At time t3, transaction TY updates the value of account A by adding $100 to the
available balance, and then it becomes $400.
• At time t4, transaction TY writes the updated value, i.e., $400.
• After that, at time t5, transaction TX reads the available value of account A, and that
will be read as $400.
• It means that within the same transaction T X, it reads two different values of account
A, i.e., $ 300 initially, and after updation made by transaction T Y, 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.
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.
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:
• Lock Based Concurrency Control Protocol
 • Time Stamp Concurrency Control Protocol
• Validation Based Concurrency Control Protocol
We will understand and discuss each protocol one by one in our next sections.

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:
• It is also known as a Read-only lock. In a shared lock, the data item can only read by
the transaction.
• 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:
• In the exclusive lock, the data item can be both reads as well as written by the
transaction.
• 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
• Pre-claiming Lock Protocols evaluate the transaction to list all the data items on
which they need locks.
• Before initiating an execution of the transaction, it requests DBMS for all the lock on
all those data items.
• 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.
• 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)
• The two-phase locking protocol divides the execution phase of the transaction into
three parts.
• In the first part, when the execution of the transaction starts, it seeks permission for
the lock it requires.
• In the second part, the transaction acquires all the locks. The third phase is started
as soon as the transaction releases its first lock.
• 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.
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:
• Growing phase: from step 1-3
• Shrinking phase: from step 5-7
• Lock point: at 3
Transaction T2:
• Growing phase: from step 2-6
• Shrinking phase: from step 8-9
• Lock point: at 6
4. Strict Two-phase locking (Strict-2PL)
• The first phase of Strict-2PL is similar to 2PL. In the first phase, after acquiring all the
locks, the transaction continues to execute normally.
• The only difference between 2PL and strict 2PL is that Strict-2PL does not release a
lock after using it.
• Strict-2PL waits until the whole transaction to commit, and then it releases all the
locks at a time.
• Strict-2PL protocol does not have shrinking phase of lock release.

It does not have cascading abort as 2PL does.

Timestamp Ordering Protocol

• 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.
• 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.
• 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.
• 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.
• 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:
• If W_TS(X) >TS(Ti) then the operation is rejected.
• If W_TS(X) <= TS(Ti) then the operation is executed.
• Timestamps of all the data items are updated.
2. Check the following condition whenever a transaction Ti issues a Write(X) operation:
• If TS(Ti) < R_TS(X) then the operation is rejected.
• 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:
• TO protocol ensures serializability since the precedence graph is as follows:

• TS protocol ensures freedom from deadlock that means no transaction ever waits.
• 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.
• 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.
• Hence TS(T) = validation(T).
• The serializability is determined during the validation process. It can't be decided in
advance.
• While executing the transaction, it ensures a greater degree of concurrency and also
less number of conflicts.
• Thus it contains transactions which have less number of rollbacks.

Thomas write Rule

Thomas Write Rule provides the guarantee of serializability order for the protocol. It improves the
Basic Timestamp Ordering Algorithm.
The basic Thomas write rules are as follows:
• If TS(T) < R_TS(X) then transaction T is aborted and rolled back, and operation is
rejected.
• If TS(T) < W_TS(X) then don't execute the W_item(X) operation of the transaction and
continue processing.
• If neither condition 1 nor condition 2 occurs, then allowed to execute the WRITE
operation by transaction Ti and set W_TS(X) to TS(T).
If we use the Thomas write rule then some serializable schedule can be permitted that does not
conflict serializable as illustrate by the schedule in a given figure:
Figure: A Serializable Schedule that is not Conflict Serializable
In the above figure, T1's read and precedes T1's write of the same data item. This schedule does not
conflict serializable.
Thomas write rule checks that T2's write is never seen by any transaction. If we delete the write
operation in transaction T2, then conflict serializable schedule can be obtained which is shown in
below figure.

Figure: A Conflict Serializable Schedule

Multiple Granularity
Let's start by understanding the meaning of granularity.
Granularity: It is the size of data item allowed to lock.
Multiple Granularity:
• It can be defined as hierarchically breaking up the database into blocks which can be
locked.
• The Multiple Granularity protocol enhances concurrency and reduces lock overhead.
• It maintains the track of what to lock and how to lock.
• It makes easy to decide either to lock a data item or to unlock a data item. This type
of hierarchy can be graphically represented as a tree.
For example: Consider a tree which has four levels of nodes.
• The first level or higher level shows the entire database.
• The second level represents a node of type area. The higher level database consists
of exactly these areas.
• The area consists of children nodes which are known as files. No file can be present
in more than one area.
 • Finally, each file contains child nodes known as records. The file has exactly those
records that are its child nodes. No records represent in more than one file.
• Hence, the levels of the tree starting from the top level are as follows:
o Database
o Area
o File
o Record

In this example, the highest level shows the entire database. The levels below are file, record, and
fields.
There are three additional lock modes with multiple granularity:
Intention Mode Lock
Intention-shared (IS): It contains explicit locking at a lower level of the tree but only with shared
locks.
Intention-Exclusive (IX): It contains explicit locking at a lower level with exclusive or shared locks.
Shared & Intention-Exclusive (SIX): In this lock, the node is locked in shared mode, and some node
is locked in exclusive mode by the same transaction.
Compatibility Matrix with Intention Lock Modes: The below table describes the compatibility
matrix for these lock modes:

It uses the intention lock modes to ensure serializability. It requires that if a transaction attempts to
lock a node, then that node must follow these protocols:
• Transaction T1 should follow the lock-compatibility matrix.
• Transaction T1 firstly locks the root of the tree. It can lock it in any mode.
• If T1 currently has the parent of the node locked in either IX or IS mode, then the
transaction T1 will lock a node in S or IS mode only.
• If T1 currently has the parent of the node locked in either IX or SIX modes, then the
transaction T1 will lock a node in X, SIX, or IX mode only.
• If T1 has not previously unlocked any node only, then the Transaction T1 can lock a
node.
• If T1 currently has none of the children of the node-locked only, then Transaction T1
will unlock a node.
Observe that in multiple-granularity, the locks are acquired in top-down order, and locks must be
released in bottom-up order.
• If transaction T1 reads record Ra9 in file Fa, then transaction T1 needs to lock the
database, area A1 and file Fa in IX mode. Finally, it needs to lock Ra2 in S mode.
• If transaction T2 modifies record Ra9 in file Fa, then it can do so after locking the
database, area A1 and file Fa in IX mode. Finally, it needs to lock the Ra9 in X mode.
• If transaction T3 reads all the records in file Fa, then transaction T3 needs to lock the
database, and area A in IS mode. At last, it needs to lock F a in S mode.
• If transaction T4 reads the entire database, then T4 needs to lock the database in S
mode.
Recovery with Concurrent Transaction
• Whenever more than one transaction is being executed, then the interleaved of logs
occur. During recovery, it would become difficult for the recovery system to
backtrack all logs and then start recovering.
• To ease this situation, 'checkpoint' concept is used by most DBMS.

Deadlock in DBMS
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 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
• 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.
• 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

• 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.
• 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
• 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.
• 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.
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
• 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.
• 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.