Advanced rule driven transaction management

Klein, Johannes

doi:10.1109/cmpcon.1991.128866

Cited by 46 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Ein weiteres Manko ist die Schwierigkeit, Logikspezifikationen zu visualisieren, und auch die Konvertierbarkeit in andere Spezifikationsmethoden ist meist ein offenes Problem. Einfache Formen temporaler Logik, insbesondere die Computation Tree Logic (CTL) [7], haben immerhin als formale Basis fü r die Spezifikation von Ausfü hrungsabhä ngigkeiten in erweiterten Transaktionsmodellen Anwendung gefunden [2,12,20], und sie spielen auch im Hinblick auf die Verifikation von Workflow-Eigenschaften eine Rolle (siehe Abschnitt 4).…”

Section: ü Bersicht ü Ber Formale Spezifikationsmethodenunclassified

Spezifikation, Verifikation und verteilte Ausführung von Workflows in MENTOR

Weikum

Wodtke

Dittrich

et al. 1997

Informatik - Forschung und Entwicklung

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Die formale Fundierung der State-und Activitycharts wird auf drei Ebenen ausgenutzt. Auf der Spezifikationsebene erzwingt der verwendete Formalismus prä-zise Beschreibungen von Geschä ftsprozessen, lä ßt jedoch ebenfalls spä tere Verfeinerungen zu. Darü ber hinaus kö nnen Spezifikationen, die mit anderen Methoden erstellt wurden, weitgehend automatisch auf State-und Activitycharts abgebildet werden. Auf der Ebene der Verifikation kritischer Workflow-Eigenschaften erö ffnen Statecharts die Anwendung der effizienten Methode des Modellprü fens. Auf der Ausfü hrungsebene schließlich kö nnen aus einer Spezifikation verteilt ausfü hrbare Komponenten generiert werden. Im Rahmen des MENTOR-Projekts wurde eine alle drei Ebenen umfassende Umgebung fü r die Spezifikation, Verifikation und verteilte Ausfü hrung von Workflows realisiert.Schlü sselwö rter: Workflow-Management, verteilte Informationssysteme, Spezifikationsmethoden, Statecharts Abstract. This article presents an approach to the specification, verification, and distributed execution of workflows based on state and activity charts. The formal foundation of state and activity charts is exploited at three levels. At the specification level, the formalism enforces precise descriptions of business processes while also allowing subsequent refinements. In addition, precise specifications based on other methods can be automatically converted into state and activity charts. At the level of verification, state charts are amenable to the efficient method of model checking, to verify particularly critical workflow properties. Finally, at the execution level, a state chart specification forms the basis for the automatic generation of modules that can be directly executed in a distributed manner. Within the MENTOR project, a coherent prototype system has been built that comprises all three levels: specification, verification, and distributed execution.

show abstract

Section: ü Bersicht ü Ber Formale Spezifikationsmethodenunclassified

Spezifikation, Verifikation und verteilte Ausführung von Workflows in MENTOR

Weikum

Wodtke

Dittrich

et al. 1997

Informatik - Forschung und Entwicklung

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A comprehensive list of transactional dependency definitions can be found in [4,8,10,22,27]. The different types of dependencies that typically occur in applications are the ones we analyze in this paper and are described below.…”

Section: Definition 4 [Dependency]mentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of dependencies in advanced transaction models

Ray

Xin

2006

Distrib Parallel Databases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transactional dependencies play an important role in coordinating and executing the subtransactions in advanced transaction processing models, such as, nested transactions and workflow transactions. Researchers have formalized the notion of transactional dependencies and have shown how various advanced transaction models can be expressed using different kinds of dependencies. Incorrect specification of dependencies can result in unpredictable behavior of the advanced transaction, which, in turn, can lead to unavailability of resources and information integrity problems. In this work, we focus on how to correctly specify dependencies in an advanced transaction. We enumerate the different kinds of dependencies that may be present in an advanced transaction and classify them into two broad categories: event ordering and event enforcement dependencies. Different event ordering and event enforcement dependencies in an advanced transaction often interact in subtle ways resulting in conflicts and redundancies. We describe the different types of conflicts that can arise due to the presence of multiple dependencies and describe how one can detect such conflicts. An advanced transaction may also contain redundant dependencies-these are dependencies that can be logically derived from other dependencies. We show how such extraneous dependencies can be eliminated to get an equivalent set of dependencies that has the same effect as the original set. Our dependency analysis is done in the context of a generalized advanced transaction model that is capable of expressing different kinds of advanced transactions.

show abstract

“…Research on workflow scheduling has largely concentrated on temporal and causality constraints, which specify existence and order dependencies among the tasks. For instance, task 1 must execute before task 2 or if task 1 executes, task 2 must execute as well (also known as Klein's existence constraint [17]) are examples of temporal/causality constraints considered in [7,9,15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%