Calvin: fast distributed transactions for partitioned database systems

By Alexander Thomson, Thaddeus Diamond, Shu-Chun Weng, Kun Ren, Philip Shao, Daniel J. Abadi. SIGMOD Conference, 2012

659 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

NetChain: Scale-Free Sub-RTT Coordination (2018, methodology): “use a benchmark workload from previous work [35, 36], which is a generalization of the new-order transaction in TPC-C benchmark [37], because the workload allows us 10-3 10-2 10-1 100 Contention Index 100 101 102 103 104 105 106”
Stronger Semantics for Low-Latency Geo-Replicated Storage (2013, neutral): “These include Calvin [56], Granola [24], MDCC [35], Orleans [15], and Walter [52].”
Spanner: Google's Globally-Distributed Database (2012, neutral): “Calvin [40] eliminates concurrency control: it pre-assigns timestamps and then executes the transactions in timestamp order.”
CockroachDB: The Resilient Geo-Distributed SQL Database (2020, background): “Calvin [66], FaunaDB [22] and SLOG [53] provide strict serializability, but because their deterministic execution framework requires the read/write sets up front, they do not support conversational SQL.”
Untangling Blockchain: A Data Processing View of Blockchain Systems (2017, background): “However, traditional databases assume a trusted environment and employ well known concurrency control techniques [2], [3], [4] to order transactions.”