Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Daniel Gómez Ferro

dblp:88/11188 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2014
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Systems, architecture and hardware · 2Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 first-author

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
2 papers
Transaction processing and concurrency control · 95% Database theory · 5%
Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
2 papers
Distributed systems · 100%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Transaction processing and concurrency control › isolation levels
snapshot isolation
0.322014
Omid: Lock-free transactional support for distributed data stores · ICDE 2014
A critique of snapshot isolation · EuroSys 2012
Distributed systems
fault tolerance
0.222014
Practical Hardening of Crash-Tolerant Systems · USENIX ATC 2012
Omid: Lock-free transactional support for distributed data stores · ICDE 2014
Transaction processing and concurrency control
distributed transaction processing
0.212014
Omid: Lock-free transactional support for distributed data stores · ICDE 2014
Transaction processing and concurrency control
isolation levels
0.112012
A critique of snapshot isolation · EuroSys 2012
Transaction processing and concurrency control
serializability
0.112012
A critique of snapshot isolation · EuroSys 2012
Distributed systems › fault tolerance › failure models
crash failures
0.112012
Practical Hardening of Crash-Tolerant Systems · USENIX ATC 2012
Distributed systems
replication
0.012012
Practical Hardening of Crash-Tolerant Systems · USENIX ATC 2012

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

snapshot isolation · 0.4centralized transaction metadata · 0.4hardening · 0.1formal analysis · 0.1fault injection · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2014 Omid: Lock-free transactional support for distributed data stores
abstract
In this paper, we introduce Omid, a tool for lock-free transactional support in large data stores such as HBase. Omid uses a centralized scheme and implements snapshot isolation, a property that guarantees that all read operations of a transaction are performed on a consistent snapshot of the data. In a lock-based approach, the unreleased, distributed locks that are held by a failed or slow client block others. By using a centralized scheme for Omid, we are able to implement a lock-free commit algorithm, which does not suffer from this problem. Moreover, Omid lightly replicates a read-only copy of the transaction metadata into the clients where they can locally service a large part of queries on metadata. Thanks to this technique, Omid does not require modifying either the source code of the data store or the tables' schema, and the overhead on data servers is also negligible. The experimental results show that our implementation on a simple dual-core machine can service up to a thousand of client machines. While the added latency is limited to only 10 ms, Omid scales up to 124K write transactions per second. Since this capacity is multiple times larger than the maximum reported traffic in similar systems, we do not expect the centralized scheme of Omid to be a bottleneck even for current large data stores.
Daniel Gómez Ferro, Flavio Paiva Junqueira, Ivan Kelly, Benjamin C. Reed, Maysam Yabandeh
ICDE1
2012 A critique of snapshot isolation
abstract
The support for transactions is an essential part of a database management system (DBMS). Without this support, the developers are burdened with ensuring atomic execution of a transaction despite failures as well as concurrent accesses to the database by other transactions. Ideally, a transactional system provides serializability, which means that the outcome of concurrent transactions is equivalent to a serial execution of them. Based on experiences on lock-based implementations, nevertheless, serializability is known as an expensive feature that comes with high overhead and low concurrency. Commercial systems, hence, compromise serializability by implementing weaker guarantees such as snapshot isolation. The developers, therefore, are still burdened with the anomalies that could arise due to the lack of serializability.
Maysam Yabandeh, Daniel Gómez Ferro
EuroSys2
2012 Practical Hardening of Crash-Tolerant Systems
Miguel Correia 0001, Daniel Gómez Ferro, Flavio Paiva Junqueira, Marco Serafini
USENIX ATC2