In timestamp ordering, W-timestamp (Q) denotes the largest timestamp of any transaction that executed write (Q) successfully. Suppose that, instead, we defined it to be the timestamp of the most recent transaction to execute write (Q) successfully.Would this change in wording make any difference? Explain your answer.
Answer to relevant QuestionsWhen a transaction is rolled back under timestamp ordering, it is assigned a new timestamp. Why can it not simply keep its old timestamp?Show that there are schedules that are possible under the two-phase locking protocol, but are not possible under the timestamp protocol, and vice versa.Suppose that we use the tree protocol of Section 16.1.5 to manage concurrent access to a B+-tree. Since a split may occur on an insert that affects the root, it appears that an insert operation cannot release any locks until ...Consider a database consisting of 10 consecutive disk blocks (block 1, block 2, . . ., block 10). Show the buffer state and a possible physical ordering of the blocks after the following updates, assuming that shadow paging ...Transaction server architectures are popular for client-server relational databases, where transactions are short. On the other hand, data server architectures are popular for client-server object-oriented database systems, ...
Post your question