Minimizing coordination, or blocking communication between concurrently executing operations, is key to maximizing scalability, availability, and high performance in database systems. However, uninhibited coordination-free execution can compromise application correctness, or consistency. When is coordination necessary for correctness? The classic use of serializable transactions is sufficient to maintain correctness but is not necessary for all applications, sacrificing potential scalability. In this paper, we develop a formal framework, invariant confluence, that determines whether an application requires coordination for correct execution. By operating on application-level invariants over database states (e.g., integrity constraints), invariant confluence analysis provides a necessary and sufficient condition for safe, coordination-free execution. When programmers specify their application invariants, this analysis allows databases to coordinate only when anomalies that might violate invariants are possible. We analyze the invariant confluence of common invariants and operations from real-world database systems (i.e., integrity constraints) and applications and show that many are invariant confluent and therefore achievable without coordination. We apply these results to a proof-of-concept coordination-avoiding database prototype and demonstrate sizable performance gains compared to serializable execution, notably a 25-fold improvement over prior TPC-C New-Order performance on a 200 server cluster.

Shallow men believe in luck. . . Strong men believe in cause and effect.-Ralph Waldo Emerson ABSTRACTWe consider the problem of separating consistency-related safety properties from availability and durability in distributed data stores via the application of a "bolt-on" shim layer that upgrades the safety of an underlying general-purpose data store. This shim provides the same consistency guarantees atop a wide range of widely deployed but often inflexible stores. As causal consistency is one of the strongest consistency models that remain available during system partitions, we develop a shim layer that upgrades eventually consistent stores to provide convergent causal consistency. Accordingly, we leverage widely deployed eventually consistent infrastructure as a common substrate for providing causal guarantees. We describe algorithms and shim implementations that are suitable for a large class of application-level causality relationships and evaluate our techniques using an existing, production-ready data store and with real-world explicit causality relationships.

Databases can provide scalability by partitioning data across several servers. However, multi-partition, multi-operation transactional access is often expensive, employing coordination-intensive locking, validation, or scheduling mechanisms. Accordingly, many real-world systems avoid mechanisms that provide useful semantics for multi-partition operations. This leads to incorrect behavior for a large class of applications including secondary indexing, foreign key enforcement, and materialized view maintenance. In this work, we identify a new isolation model-Read Atomic (RA) isolation-that matches the requirements of these use cases by ensuring atomic visibility: either all or none of each transaction's updates are observed by other transactions. We present algorithms for Read Atomic Multi-Partition (RAMP) transactions that enforce atomic visibility while offering excellent scalability, guaranteed commit despite partial failures (via synchronization independence), and minimized communication between servers (via partition independence). These RAMP transactions correctly mediate atomic visibility of updates and provide readers with snapshot access to database state by using limited multi-versioning and by allowing clients to independently resolve non-atomic reads. We demonstrate that, in contrast with existing algorithms, RAMP transactions incur limited overhead-even under high contention-and scale linearly to 100 servers.