Conditional Commit Database Transaction Processing

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing database systems face overhead and deadlock issues due to locking mechanisms when multiple transactions require access to the same variable, leading to performance degradation and potential data corruption.

Innovation Solution

Implementing a system with multiple conditional commit databases that allows access to data without locking, using a processor to check conditions locally and indicate to other servers, enabling transactions to proceed as long as conditions are met, and ensuring data synchronization only when necessary.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If locking mechanisms are used to maintain synchronization of variables between multiple databases, then data consistency is improved, but system overhead increases and deadlocks occur

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedata consistencyVSAvoidsystem overhead

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary condition checks and validation before actual data access or modification. Each database node evaluates transaction conditions and determines compatibility with existing locks in advance, allowing safe transactions to proceed without acquiring locks while blocking only incompatible transactions. This preliminary assessment eliminates the need for conservative locking on all data access operations.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The locking mechanism transitions from a static, always-applied approach to a dynamic, condition-based approach. The system adaptively determines whether locking is necessary for each specific transaction based on condition evaluation results, allowing the system to switch between locked and unlocked states dynamically rather than maintaining fixed locking protocols.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

2Reliability

If locking mechanisms are used to maintain synchronization of variables between multiple databases, then data consistency is improved, but processing speed decreases due to deadlock prevention requirements

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedata consistencyVSAvoidprocessing speed

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSSpeed

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary condition checks and validation before actual data access or modification. Each database node evaluates transaction conditions and determines compatibility with existing locks in advance, allowing safe transactions to proceed without acquiring locks while blocking only incompatible transactions. This preliminary assessment eliminates the need for conservative locking on all data access operations.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system extracts the locking requirement from the general data access process and applies it selectively only when necessary. By removing locks from transactions that pass condition checks and only applying locking to transactions that fail compatibility evaluation, the system eliminates unnecessary locking overhead and speed penalties while maintaining consistency where required.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

3Reliability

If multiple databases store the same variables to achieve high availability and redundancy, then system reliability is improved, but synchronization complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvehigh availabilityVSAvoidsynchronization complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary condition checks and validation before actual data access or modification. Each database node evaluates transaction conditions and determines compatibility with existing locks in advance, allowing safe transactions to proceed without acquiring locks while blocking only incompatible transactions. This preliminary assessment eliminates the need for conservative locking on all data access operations.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements a feedback mechanism where each database node communicates transaction status, lock compatibility results, and condition evaluation outcomes to other nodes. This feedback allows databases to coordinate their actions based on real-time system state, enabling automatic conflict resolution and consistent state propagation without complex centralized synchronization protocols.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentEP2550632B1System with multiple conditional commit databases

Publication Date: 2019.07.10 MATRIXX SOFTWARE

Figure 1A~1B
Figure 1C
Figure 1D

AI summary

A system for processing a transaction is disclosed. The system comprises a processor and a memory. The processor is configured to check a condition using data in a first database, wherein the data is associated with a transaction, wherein the data in the first database is latched before checking the condition and is unlatched after checking the condition. The processor is further configured to indicate to a second database to check the condition using data in the second database, wherein the data is associated with the transaction. The data in the second database is latched before checking the condition and is unlatched after checking the condition. The memory is coupled to the processor and configured to provide the processor with instructions.