Abstract

this paper planned conversations (in which a set of communicating processes are rolled back together), which also allow the recomputation after roll-back to use different code from the first computation, so that errors caused by software design faults may not be repeated at the new execution [Randell 1975], and atomic transactions (in which a sequence of changes on a set of data items are undone together), which allow the designer to manage together error recovery and concurrency control in accessing data [Lynch, Merrit et al. 1993]. Conversations and atomic transactions are in fact dual models of recovery, as discussed in [Shrivastava, Mancini et al. 1993]: they are two ways of describing the same backward recovery philosophy in the two models (or design styles) which the authors of [Shrivastava, Mancini et al. 1993] call the "object-action" model (where the long-term state of the computation is encapsulated in data objects, and active processes invoke operations on these objects), and the "process-conversation" model (where the state is contained in the processes, which communicate via messages).

Citations