Transactions and Concurrency Control

ACID, MVCC, and serializability.


foundation tier

Transactions and Concurrency Control addresses acid, mvcc, and serializability. It sits within Databases and inherits that area’s core questions about correctness, scale, and tractability. This page surveys the conceptual axes of the topic and points to the references that frame ongoing research and teaching. The intent is to be useful both as an entry point for newcomers and as an index for practitioners cross-checking their mental model against the field’s primary sources.

Work on transactions and concurrency control can be organised around a few interlocking concerns: the formal objects under study, the algorithms or systems that compute over them, the resource trade-offs (time, memory, communication, statistical efficiency), and the empirical or theoretical guarantees that practitioners rely on. The sources cited below approach the topic from a mix of these angles.

Foundational references

Silberschatz, Database System Concepts (2019) is a standard reference for this material and is used both as a curriculum anchor and as a long-form survey of techniques.

Supporting and complementary work

Hellerstein, Readings in Database Systems (2015) provides supporting material that complements the primary references — readers comparing approaches will find useful framings, alternative notations, or extensions there.

Open methodological questions in transactions and concurrency control cluster around how to compose the techniques above under realistic constraints — scale, adversarial inputs, partial observability, and shifting workloads. The cited references give the precise statements, proofs, and empirical evaluations that this overview only sketches; downstream topic pages drill into specific subfields.

Prerequisites

Sources

In context

Where this topic sits in the prerequisite graph. Click any node to jump.

Open in full atlas →


Review this topic

This page was drafted by an agent and is waiting on expert review. Spotted a wrong prerequisite, a missing concept, a misattributed source, or a factual slip? Tell us — your review opens a tracked issue maintainers act on.