Semantic response to lock requests to reduce coherence...

Details Semantic response to lock requests to reduce coherence... Semantic response to lock requests to reduce coherence...

2002-01-22

2011-12-27

Chen, Susan Y (Department: 2161)

Data processing: database and file management or data structures

Data integrity

Concurrent read/write management using locks

C707S703000, C707S689000

Reexamination Certificate

active

08086579

ABSTRACT:
Techniques are provided for lock management. The techniques are based on an enhanced lock management system that generates a semantic response in response to lock requests for a resource. The semantic response communicates both the underlying cause blocking the request, and information that may be used by the requester to obtain notification of when the underlying cause should no longer lead to denial of the lock request. The semantic response may be generated by the master of the resource, who provides the semantic response to the local lock manager of the lock requester. The semantic response may be retained by the local lock manager so that the semantic response can be provided to subsequent lock requesters, without need for interacting with another lock manager on another node.

REFERENCES:
patent: 4438494 (1984-03-01), Budde et al.
patent: 4814971 (1989-03-01), Thatte
patent: 5285528 (1994-02-01), Hart
patent: 5410697 (1995-04-01), Baird et al.
patent: 5440732 (1995-08-01), Lomet et al.
patent: 5454108 (1995-09-01), Devarakonda et al.
patent: 5524205 (1996-06-01), Lomet et al.
patent: 5551046 (1996-08-01), Mohan et al.
patent: 5596754 (1997-01-01), Lomet
patent: 5659682 (1997-08-01), Devarakonda et al.
patent: 5682537 (1997-10-01), Davies et al.
patent: 5721943 (1998-02-01), Johnson
patent: 5832484 (1998-11-01), Sankaran et al.
patent: 5933838 (1999-08-01), Lomet
patent: 5933849 (1999-08-01), Srbljic et al.
patent: 5966706 (1999-10-01), Biliris et al.
patent: 5999940 (1999-12-01), Ranger
patent: 6012085 (2000-01-01), Yohe et al.
patent: 6026474 (2000-02-01), Carter et al.
patent: 6032188 (2000-02-01), Mairs et al.
patent: 6067550 (2000-05-01), Lomet
patent: 6115715 (2000-09-01), Traversat et al.
patent: 6151607 (2000-11-01), Lomet
patent: 6243814 (2001-06-01), Matena
patent: 6272491 (2001-08-01), Chan et al.
patent: 6336134 (2002-01-01), Varma
patent: 6353836 (2002-03-01), Bamford et al.
patent: 6374264 (2002-04-01), Bohannon et al.
patent: 6434555 (2002-08-01), Frolund et al.
patent: 6449623 (2002-09-01), Bohannon et al.
patent: 6453356 (2002-09-01), Sheard et al.
patent: 6453404 (2002-09-01), Bereznyi et al.
patent: 6490594 (2002-12-01), Lomet
patent: 6529906 (2003-03-01), Chan
patent: 6587921 (2003-07-01), Chiu et al.
patent: 6668295 (2003-12-01), Chan
patent: 6816873 (2004-11-01), Cotner et al.
patent: 6832120 (2004-12-01), Frank et al.
patent: 6915387 (2005-07-01), Huffman et al.
patent: 6920454 (2005-07-01), Chan
patent: 7085911 (2006-08-01), Sachedina et al.
patent: 2004/0225742 (2004-11-01), Loaiza et al.
patent: 2005/0149540 (2005-07-01), Chan et al.
Norvag, Kjetil, “Issues in transaction-time temporal object database systems”, Oct.-Dec. 2001, Journal of Database Management v12, n4, pp. 40-51.
Written Opinion from PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US02/06981 dated Oct. 3, 2004(8 pgs.).
Current Claims in PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US02/06981 (8 pgs.).
Office Action from Canadian Patent Application No. 2,448,050 dated Oct. 1, 2004 (2 pgs).
Current Claims in Canadian Patent Application No. 2, 448,050 (48 pgs).
U.S. Appl. No. 09/746,580, filed Dec. 20, 2000.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/798,618, filed Mar. 1, 2001.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/798,617, filed Mar. 1, 2001.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/871,853, filed May 31, 2001.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/092,047, filed Mar. 4, 2002.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/091,618, filed Mar. 4, 2002.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/435,229, filed May 9, 2003.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/092,047, filed Mar. 4, 2002, Office Action Mailing Date Mar. 9, 2005.
Lory D. Molesky et al., “Database Locking Protocols for Large-Scale Cache-Coherent Shared Memory Multiprocessors: Design, Implementation and Performance,” Jun. 6, 1995, pp. 1-24.
Lory D. Molesky et al., “Efficient Locking for Shared Memory Database Systems,” Mar. 1994, 28 pages.
Rahm, E., “Concurrency and Coherency Control in Database Sharing Systems” (1993) pp. 1-62.
U.S. Appl. No. 09/798,618, filed Mar. 1, 2001, Office Action Mailing Date Mar. 7, 2006.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/091,618, filed Mar. 4, 2002, Office Action Mailing Date Jul. 7, 2005.
Andrew S. Tanenbaum. “Structured Computer Organization” (Second Edition) 1984, pp. 10-12.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/832,527, filed Apr. 26, 2004, Office Action Mailing Date Apr. 19, 2007.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/000,818, filed Nov. 30, 2004, Office Action Mailing Date Apr. 19, 2007.

Affiliated with

Also associated with

Rating

Semantic response to lock requests to reduce coherence... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.

If you have personal experience with Semantic response to lock requests to reduce coherence..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Semantic response to lock requests to reduce coherence... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

Comments { 0 }

Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-4293533