Intelligent Transaction Scheduling to Enhance Concurrency in High-Contention Workloads
Source abstract
Abstract
Concurrency control (CC) scheme based on transaction decomposition has significantly enhanced the concurrency performance of multicore in-memory databases, surpassing traditional CC schemes such as two-phase locking (2PL) or optimistic concurrency control (OCC), particularly in high-contention scenarios. However, this performance improvement introduces new challenges, as balancing transaction dependency constraints with enhanced concurrency optimization remains a persistent issue, especially with the increased number of concurrent client requests, which can lead to complex transaction dependencies. To address these challenges, we propose Dynamic Contention Scheduling (DCoS), a novel method that enhances transaction concurrency via a dual-granularity architecture. DCoS integrates a deep reinforcement learning (DRL)-based executor to schedule high-contention transactions while preserving dependency correctness. DCoS employs a one-shot execution model that enables fine-grained scheduling in high-contention scenarios, while retaining lightweight in-partition execution under low-contention conditions. The experimental results on both micro- and macro-benchmarks demonstrate that DCoS achieves a throughput up to three times higher than state-of-the-art CC protocols under high-contention workloads.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Distributed systems and fault tolerance · Interconnection Networks and Systems · Distributed and Parallel Computing Systems
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
College of Computer Science and Technology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China
Zhejiang Laboratory, Hangzhou 311121, China
Funding
National Key R&D Program of China · Key R&D Program of Zhejiang
References (36)
Show source-provided references
1. Yu, X., Bezerra, G., Pavlo, A., Devadas, S., and Stonebraker, M. (2014). Staring into the Abyss: An Evaluation of Concurrency Control with One Thousand Cores, MIT Labraries.10.14778/2735508.2735511 ↗
2. Pavlo, A., Curino, C., and Zdonik, S. (2012, January 20–24). Skew-aware automatic database partitioning in shared-nothing, parallel OLTP systems. Proceedings of the 2012 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.10.1145/2213836.2213844 ↗
3. Curino, C., Jones, E.P.C., Zhang, Y., and Madden, S.R. (2010). Schism: A Workload-Driven Approach to Database Replication and Partitioning, MIT Labraries.10.14778/1920841.1920853 ↗
4. Gray, J., and Reuter, A. (1992). Transaction Processing: Concepts and Techniques, Elsevier.
5. On optimistic methods for concurrency control10.1145/319566.319567 ↗
6. Transaction chopping: Algorithms and performance studies10.1145/211414.211427 ↗
7. Zhang, Y., Power, R., Zhou, S., Sovran, Y., Aguilera, M.K., and Li, J. (2013, January 3–6). Transaction chains: Achieving serializability with low latency in geo-distributed storage systems. Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, Farmington, PA, USA.10.1145/2517349.2522729 ↗
8. Wang, Z., Mu, S., Cui, Y., Yi, H., Chen, H., and Li, J. (July, January 26). Scaling multicore databases via constrained parallel execution. Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Management of Data, San Francisco, CA, USA.10.1145/2882903.2882934 ↗
9. Xie, C., Su, C., Littley, C., Alvisi, L., Kapritsos, M., and Wang, Y. (2015, January 5–7). High-performance ACID via modular concurrency control. Proceedings of the 25th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, Monterey, CA, USA.10.1145/2815400.2815430 ↗
10. Reordering transaction execution to boost high-frequency trading applications10.1007/s41019-017-0054-0 ↗
11. DRL-R: Deep reinforcement learning approach for intelligent routing in software-defined data-center networks10.1016/j.jnca.2020.102865 ↗
12. Joint routing and scheduling optimization in time-sensitive networks using graph-convolutional-network-based deep reinforcement learning10.1109/JIOT.2022.3188826 ↗
13. A DRL-based reactive scheduling policy for flexible job shops with random job arrivals10.1109/TASE.2023.3271666 ↗
14. Clay: Fine-grained adaptive partitioning for general database schemas10.14778/3025111.3025125 ↗
15. Prasaad, G., Cheung, A., and Suciu, D. (2020, January 14–19). Handling highly contended OLTP workloads using fast dynamic partitioning. Proceedings of the 2020 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, Portland, OR, USA.10.1145/3318464.3389764 ↗
16. Multiversion concurrency control—Theory and algorithms10.1145/319996.319998 ↗
17. Thomson, A., Diamond, T., Weng, S.C., Ren, K., Shao, P., and Abadi, D.J. (2012, January 20–24). Calvin: Fast distributed transactions for partitioned database systems. Proceedings of the 2012 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, Scottsdale, Arizona.10.1145/2213836.2213838 ↗
18. Improving optimistic concurrency control through transaction batching and operation reordering10.14778/3282495.3282502 ↗
19. Li, J., Lu, Y., Wang, Q., Lin, J., Yang, Z., and Shu, J. (2022, January 11–13). {AlNiCo}:{SmartNIC-accelerated} contention-aware request scheduling for transaction processing. Proceedings of the 2022 USENIX Annual Technical Conference (USENIX ATC 22), Carlsbad, CA, USA.
20. Guo, Z., Wu, K., Yan, C., and Yu, X. (2021, January 20–25). Releasing locks as early as you can: Reducing contention of hotspots by violating two-phase locking. Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Management of Data, Xi’an, China.10.1145/3448016.3457294 ↗
21. Zamanian, E., Shun, J., Binnig, C., and Kraska, T. (2020, January 14–19). Chiller: Contention-centric transaction execution and data partitioning for modern networks. Proceedings of the 2020 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, Portland, OR, USA.10.1145/3318464.3389724 ↗
22. Data-oriented transaction execution10.14778/1920841.1920959 ↗
23. Qadah, T., Gupta, S., and Sadoghi, M. (April, January 30). Q-Store: Distributed, Multi-partition Transactions via Queue-oriented Execution and Communication. Proceedings of the EDBT 23rd International Conference on Extending Database Technology, Copenhagen, Denmark.
24. Exploiting single-threaded model in multi-core in-memory systems10.1109/TKDE.2016.2578319 ↗
25. Qadah, T.M., and Sadoghi, M. (2018, January 10–14). Quecc: A queue-oriented, control-free concurrency architecture. Proceedings of the 19th International Middleware Conference, Rennes, France.10.1145/3274808.3274810 ↗
26. H-store: A high-performance, distributed main memory transaction processing system10.14778/1454159.1454211 ↗
27. Tu, S., Zheng, W., Kohler, E., Liskov, B., and Madden, S. (2013, January 3–6). Speedy transactions in multicore in-memory databases. Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, Farmington, PA, USA.10.1145/2517349.2522713 ↗
28. Transaction Scheduling: From Conflicts to Runtime Conflicts10.1145/3588706 ↗
29. Xu, K., Hu, W., Leskovec, J., and Jegelka, S. (2018). How powerful are graph neural networks?. arXiv.
30. Learning to dispatch for job shop scheduling via deep reinforcement learning
31. Schulman, J., Wolski, F., Dhariwal, P., Radford, A., and Klimov, O. (2017). Proximal policy optimization algorithms. arXiv.
32. A comprehensive survey on transfer learning10.1109/JPROC.2020.3004555 ↗
33. (2025, May 31). DBx1000. Available online: https://github.com/yxymit/DBx1000.
34. Kingma, D.P., and Ba, J. (2014). Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv.
35. Transaction Processing Performance Council (2010). TPC-C Standards Specification, Transaction Processing Performance Council. Technical Report.
36. Transaction Processing Performance Council (2015). TPC-E Standards Specification, Transaction Processing Performance Council. Technical Report.