Towards a Model for Multidatabase Transactions

Rusinkiewicz, Marek; Krychniak, P.; Cichocki, Andrzej

doi:10.1142/s0218215792000155

Cited by 16 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Examples of such models include Sagas [32], Nested Transactions [62], Open Nested Transactions [91], Multidatabase Transactions [76], and others. To complete a saga, either the whole sequence is successfully executed (saga commits) or the effects of already committed subtransactions are undone by a sequence of compensating subtransactions (saga aborts).…”

Section: Extended Transaction Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Multidatabase transactions [76] have been proposed as a transaction model suitable for a multidatabase environment, i.e., for an environment where an application spans multiple, autonomous and heterogeneous database systems. The multidatabase transaction model is an extension of the flexible transactions introduced in [73] and [26].…”

Section: Multidatabase Transactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…ConTracts [71], multitransactions [31] and multidatabase transactions [75] support Ii priori specification of dependencies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Workflow and Process Automation

Cichocki¹,

Helal²,

Rusinkiewicz³

et al. 1998

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Workflow and process automation : concepts and technology I by AndrzejCichocki ... [et al.]. p. cm. --(Kluwer international series in engineering and computer science ; SECS 432) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-4613-7599-9 ISBN 978-1-4615-5677-0 (eBook)This chapter is focused on the first phase of the workflow application life cycle (Figure 2.1) that is responsible for process modeling and investigation of its properties.The purpose of modeling is to produce an abstraction of a process (mode~ that serves as a basis for the workflow specification. The model of a process enables us to understand what activities, dependencies among activities, and roles (human or information system skills) are necessary to the process.Process modeling methodologies can be mainly divided into the following three categories: communication-based, artifact-based and activity-based. Communication-based ModelingThe communication-based methodologies are based on Winograd/Flores "Conversation for Action Model" [92]. This methodology type represents an action in a workflow based on communication between a customer and a performer. This communication consists of four phases that are defined as follows (Figure 2.2):1. Request -a customer requests an action to be performed CHAPTER 2 Analysis Administration Development Execution Figure 2.1 Life cycle of a workflow application [41] Request ~ \ B9 Offstlon Customer ~ow ~ Pertonner Acceptance Performance Figure 2.2 Conversation for action model 2. Negotiation -customer and performer agree on the action to be performed 3. Performance -the action is performed 4. Acceptance -the customer reports satisfaction with the action Process Technology Customer r::~ Equipment Proc't Office Proc't Office Verify ~ Accounts ~J~ Get~ Vendors k J ~~ V~dM Figure 2.3 Communication-based workflow of procure equipment process 7

show abstract

Section: Extended Transaction Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Multidatabase Transactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Workflow and Process Automation

Cichocki¹,

Helal²,

Rusinkiewicz³

et al. 1998

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A global transaction G is a 3-tuple G=(ST,DT,TO) where -ST is the set of global transactions and/or subtransactions that are the children of G; -DT is the dependency type among the transactions in ST; -TO is the total order on ST according to the dependency specified in DT. Global serializability can be provided by obtaining the information of relative serialization order of subtransactions at each local site and guaranteeing the same relative order at all those sites [6].…”

Section: Definition3mentioning

confidence: 99%

A transaction model for multidatabase systems

Devirmiş

Ulusoy

1996

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…R ECENTLY, the design and construction of Workflow Management Systems (WFMS) has emerged as an important area in both theory and practice (e.g., [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]). We borrow our definition of a workflow from [1] who defines a workflow as a collection of tasks organized to accomplish some business objective.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

SEAM: A state-entity-activity-model for a well-defined workflow development methodology

Bajaj

Ram²

2002

IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstractÐCurrent conceptual workflow models use either informally defined conceptual models or several formally defined conceptual models that capture different aspects of the workflow, e.g., the data, process, and organizational aspects of the workflow. To the best of our knowledge, there are no algorithms that can amalgamate these models to yield a single view of reality. A fragmented conceptual view is useful for systems analysis and documentation. However, it fails to realize the potential of conceptual models to provide a convenient interface to automate the design and management of workflows. First, as a step toward accomplishing this objective, we propose SEAM (State-Entity-Activity-Model), a conceptual workflow model defined in terms of set theory. Second, no attempt has been made, to the best of our knowledge, to incorporate time into a conceptual workflow model. SEAM incorporates the temporal aspect of workflows. Third, we apply SEAM to a real-life organizational unit's workflows. In this work, we show a subset of the workflows modeled for this organization using SEAM. We also demonstrate, via a prototype application, how the SEAM schema can be implemented on a relational database management system. We present the lessons we learned about the advantages obtained for the organization and, for developers who choose to use SEAM, we also present potential pitfalls in using the SEAM methodology to build workflow systems on relational platforms. The information contained in this work is sufficient enough to allow application developers to utilize SEAM as a methodology to analyze, design, and construct workflow applications on current relational database management systems. The definition of SEAM as a context-free grammar, definition of its semantics, and its mapping to relational platforms should be sufficient also, to allow the construction of an automated workflow design and construction tool with SEAM as the user interface.

show abstract

Towards a Model for Multidatabase Transactions

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

Workflow and Process Automation

Workflow and Process Automation

A transaction model for multidatabase systems

SEAM: A state-entity-activity-model for a well-defined workflow development methodology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About