English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Part 3: StorageInternational audienceWith the advent of cloud computing, many applications have embraced the ensuing paradigm shift towards modern distributed key-value data stores, like HBase, in order to benefit from the elastic scalability on offer. However, many applications still hesitate to make the leap from the traditional relational database model simply because they cannot compromise on the standard transactional guarantees of atomicity, isolation, and durability. To get the best of both worlds, one option is to integrate an independent transaction management component with a distributed key-value store. In this paper, we discuss the implications of this approach for durability. In particular, if the transaction manager provides durability (e.g., through logging), then we can relax durability constraints in the key-value store. However, if a component fails (e.g., a client or a key-value server), then we need a coordinated recovery procedure to ensure that commits are persisted correctly. In our research, we integrate an independent transaction manager with HBase. Our main contribution is a failure recovery middleware for the integrated system, which tracks the progress of each commit as it is flushed down by the client and persisted within HBase, so that we can recover reliably from failures. During recovery, commits that were interrupted by the failure are replayed from the transaction management log. Importantly, the recovery process does not interrupt transaction processing on the available servers. Using a benchmark, we evaluate the impact of component failure, and subsequent recovery, on application performance

Transactional Failure Recovery for a Distributed Key-Value Store