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

Ofri Ziv

dblp:163/3132 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2015
—ORCID · none

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

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 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.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Concurrent programming · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Concurrent programming
concurrency control
0.212015
Composing concurrency control · PLDI 2015
Concurrent programming › concurrency control
serializability
0.212015
Composing concurrency control · PLDI 2015
Concurrent programming
transactional memory
0.212015
Composing concurrency control · PLDI 2015

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

two-phase locking · 0.2two-phase commit · 0.2software transactional memory · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2015 Composing concurrency control
abstract
Concurrency control poses significant challenges when composing computations over multiple data-structures (objects) with different concurrency-control implementations. We formalize the usually desired requirements (serializability, abort-safety, deadlock-safety, and opacity) as well as stronger versions of these properties that enable composition. We show how to compose protocols satisfying these properties so that the resulting combined protocol also satisfies these properties. Our approach generalizes well-known protocols (such as two-phase-locking and two-phase-commit) and leads to new protocols. We apply this theory to show how we can safely compose optimistic and pessimistic concurrency control. For example, we show how we can execute a transaction that accesses two objects, one controlled by an STM and another by locking.
Ofri Ziv, Alex Aiken, Guy Golan-Gueta, G. Ramalingam, Shmuel Sagiv
PLDI1