Re: Concurrency in an RDB

"David" <davidbl_at_iinet.net.au> wrote in news:1166489213.076542.73990_at_79g2000cws.googlegroups.com:

> NENASHI, Tegiri wrote:

>> "David" <davidbl_at_iinet.net.au> wrote in
>> news:1166446464.885673.257380_at_f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>>

>> > Consider that 50% of the individual transactions break the
>> > constraint. Then batching won't help.  Eg try a batch of size 2. 
>> > Expectation value of number of compiles per batch = 0.25*1 + 0.25*2
>> > + 0.5*3 = 2.25, which is actually worse than not batching at all.
>> >
>>
>> How it is possible that the expectation is 2.25 ?  It is 0.25*1 +
>> 0.25*1 + 0.25*2 = 1  -- one is incorrect two times and two are
>> incorect one time.  It is the same like with individual arrival and
>> it is not surprising because the model of probability is the same.

Very well. But I do not understand what it means to compile the entire batch. If the batch has two transactions one needs two compiles, or may be three compiles two for each transaction and one for the batch why only one compile ?

>
> Otherwise it is necessary to compile after applying only T1. If this
> succeeds then we deduce that T2 is bad. This occurs 25% of the time,
> and required two compiles.

It is the same -- three or two compiles because it does not matter if the transaction is bad or it is good.

>
> Otherwise we have to compensate (or discard) T1. Since we have
> already performed two compiles and we haven't done anything to
> determine the correctness of T2, this case (which occurs 50% of the
> time) requires 3 compiles.

I do not understand. Perhaps you describe again what is the transaction compile and when it takes place and why you need the compiles for the entire batch plus compiles for the individual transactions.

SO far I see from your words that the number of compiles does not depend of if transaction is bad or good because the compile is needed always, so the percent of bad transactions does not play a role.

--
Tegi



> 

> Cheers,

> David


>