Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Ariel Weisberg
dblp:131/4488
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2014
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Transaction processing and concurrency control · 87% Database system architecture and tuning · 13% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Transaction processing and concurrency control
recovery |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Rethinking main memory OLTP recovery · ICDE 2014 |
Transaction processing and concurrency control › recovery
write-ahead logging |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Rethinking main memory OLTP recovery · ICDE 2014 |
Database system architecture and tuning
main-memory database |
0.1 | 1 | 2014 | Rethinking main memory OLTP recovery · ICDE 2014 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
command replay · 0.2checkpointing · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | Rethinking main memory OLTP recoveryabstractFine-grained, record-oriented write-ahead logging, as exemplified by systems like ARIES, has been the gold standard for relational database recovery. In this paper, we show that in modern high-throughput transaction processing systems, this is no longer the optimal way to recover a database system. In particular, as transaction throughputs get higher, ARIES-style logging starts to represent a non-trivial fraction of the overall transaction execution time. We propose a lighter weight, coarse-grained command logging technique which only records the transactions that were executed on the database. It then does recovery by starting from a transactionally consistent checkpoint and replaying the commands in the log as if they were new transactions. By avoiding the overhead of fine-grained logging of before and after images (both CPU complexity as well as substantial associated 110), command logging can yield significantly higher throughput at run-time. Recovery times for command logging are higher compared to an ARIEs-style physiological logging approach, but with the advent of high-availability techniques that can mask the outage of a recovering node, recovery speeds have become secondary in importance to run-time performance for most applications. We evaluated our approach on an implementation of TPCC in a main memory database system (VoltDB), and found that command logging can offer 1.5 x higher throughput than a main-memory optimized implementation of ARIEs-style physiological logging. Nirmesh Malviya, Ariel Weisberg, Samuel Madden 0001, Michael Stonebraker |
ICDE | 2 |