Transaction Isolation Levels in Distributed DBs

Transaction isolation levels are crucial for maintaining data consistency in distributed databases. Here's what you need to know:

• Isolation levels control how transactions interact when multiple users access the database simultaneously
• There are 4 main levels: Read Uncommitted, Read Committed, Repeatable Read, and Serializable
• Higher levels offer better data protection but can slow performance
• Lower levels are faster but riskier for data integrity

Key takeaways:

• Choose the right level based on your app's specific needs
• Most applications don't require the highest isolation level
• Distributed systems make isolation more challenging
• New trends like AI and blockchain are changing isolation strategies

Here's a quick comparison of isolation levels:

Isolation Level	Dirty Reads	Non-repeatable Reads	Phantom Reads	Performance
Read Uncommitted	Yes	Yes	Yes	Fastest
Read Committed	No	Yes	Yes	Fast
Repeatable Read	No	No	Yes	Medium
Serializable	No	No	No	Slowest

Remember: Balance data integrity with speed based on your use case. As one expert puts it:

"Most people don't need high levels of isolation. Most people aren't doing payments."

Related video from YouTube

Common isolation levels

Database systems use isolation levels to handle concurrent transactions. Let's break down the most common ones:

Read Uncommitted

The wild west of isolation levels. It lets transactions see uncommitted data. Fast? Yes. Reliable? Not so much.

Example: Transaction A updates a row. Transaction B reads it before A commits. If A rolls back, B just saw data that never actually existed. Oops.

Read Committed

A step up. Transactions only see committed data. It's PostgreSQL's default and popular in OLTP systems.

Each SQL statement gets a snapshot of committed data when it starts. But it doesn't stop non-repeatable or phantom reads.

Repeatable Read

Gives a consistent view throughout the entire transaction. Stops non-repeatable reads, but phantom reads can still sneak in.

MySQL's default. Good for reporting and data warehousing where consistency is key.

Serializable

The strict parent of isolation levels. Complete isolation between transactions. No dirty reads, non-repeatable reads, or phantom reads.

Great for data consistency, not so great for performance. SQL Server, for instance, uses key range locks until the transaction ends.

Snapshot Isolation

Provides a consistent read snapshot at the start of the transaction. High concurrency while maintaining consistency.

YugabyteDB uses this as its minimum level. No locks, so concurrent transactions can modify read data.

Here's how they stack up:

Isolation Level	Dirty Reads	Non-repeatable Reads	Phantom Reads
Read Uncommitted	Yes	Yes	Yes
Read Committed	No	Yes	Yes
Repeatable Read	No	No	Yes
Serializable	No	No	No
Snapshot	No	No	No*

*Snapshot usually prevents phantom reads, but some edge cases exist.

Choosing an isolation level? Think about what your app needs. Higher levels mean stronger consistency but might slow things down. For most OLTP workloads, Read Committed often hits the sweet spot between consistency and speed.

Expert views on isolation levels

Academic perspectives

Researchers stress how isolation levels keep data consistent in distributed systems. Dr. Alan Fekete from the University of Sydney says:

"Serializable Snapshot Isolation (SSI) mixes serializability with optimistic concurrency control. It lets transactions run as if they're in order, keeping data consistent without too much locking."

SSI fixes issues with optimistic concurrency control (OCC) by using multi-version concurrency control (MVCC) and read validation. It's great for complex, long-running transactions.

Industry experiences

Database engineers face real-world challenges with isolation levels. Michael Cahill, CTO of MongoDB, notes:

"Many apps, even banking and payment software, can work fine with eventually consistent reads, as long as you know how stale the data might be."

This shows that SERIALIZABLE isn't always best. Read Committed often works well for many OLTP workloads, balancing consistency and speed.

Industry experts suggest considering these points when picking isolation levels:

1. Know your database

Different databases (MySQL, SQL Server, Oracle, PostgreSQL) handle concurrency and locking differently. Learn how yours works.

2. Think about your app's needs

E-commerce sites dealing with inventory updates and purchases might need SSI to keep data accurate and avoid order issues.

3. Balance consistency and speed

Higher isolation levels give better consistency but can use more memory, cause more conflicts, and slow things down. For example:

Isolation Level	Consistency	Speed	Example Use
Read Uncommitted	Low	Fast	Live stock prices
Read Committed	Medium	Medium	Inventory tracking
Serializable	High	Slow	Bank transactions

4. Design for idempotency

If your app can handle repeat operations safely, you might be able to use lower isolation levels without messing up your data.

Difficulties in implementing isolation

Implementing transaction isolation in distributed databases is tough. Here's why:

Network issues

Network problems can mess up transaction isolation and slow things down. Think about:

• Latency: Slow networks = more conflicts and timeouts.
• Partitions: Parts of the system can get cut off, leading to inconsistencies.

As Richard Henderson puts it:

"The problem is that by distributing a transaction, you create a very tight dependency between two independent physical devices."

This can cause a domino effect of failures if you're not careful.

Scaling concerns

Balancing isolation and scalability is tricky. Better isolation often means worse scalability due to more locking and coordination.

Isolation Level	Scalability Impact	Performance Impact
Read Uncommitted	High	High
Read Committed	Medium	Medium
Serializable	Low	Low

To help with scaling:

• Split data across nodes
• Use optimistic concurrency control
• Pick the lowest isolation level that works

Consistency vs. availability

The CAP theorem shows you can't have it all in distributed systems. You've got to choose:

• Strong consistency: Same data everywhere, but might be less available
• High availability: System stays up, but data might be off for a bit

For example, banks need consistency to avoid overdrafts. E-commerce sites might prefer availability during big sales.

To handle this:

• Use eventual consistency for less critical data
• Use consensus algorithms for the important stuff
• Plan for network issues

Implementing isolation in distributed systems means juggling these challenges to keep things running smoothly and accurately.

Tips for choosing isolation levels

Picking the right isolation level for your distributed database is crucial. Here's how:

App-specific factors

Think about what your app needs:

• Financial apps? Go for Serializable or Repeatable Read.
• Real-time data like social media metrics? Read Uncommitted works.
• E-commerce? Read Committed often hits the sweet spot.

Performance effects

Isolation levels affect speed:

Isolation Level	Performance	Consistency
Read Uncommitted	Fastest	Lowest
Read Committed	Fast	Medium
Repeatable Read	Medium	High
Serializable	Slowest	Highest

Balancing consistency and speed

Find what works for you:

• Read-heavy apps? Try Snapshot Isolation. YugabyteDB hit 45K writes/sec with 4.5-6ms latency.
• Write-intensive apps? Read Committed often does the job. Amazon Aurora and Oracle use it for many workloads.
• Critical transactions? Go Serializable, but watch out for slowdowns. CockroachDB uses this as its lowest level.

"The minimum isolation level to ensure in your application is Read Committed, as it prevents dirty reads", says a database expert.

Here's what to do:

1. Start with Read Committed.

2. Test your app's performance under different levels.

3. Tweak based on your specific needs and data patterns.

sbb-itb-96038d7

New trends in transaction management

The distributed database world is changing. Here are some key trends in transaction management:

New isolation level ideas

Researchers are cooking up better isolation levels:

• Serializable Snapshot Isolation (SSI): It's fast like snapshot isolation but guarantees serializability. PostgreSQL's SSI implementation in 2012 was 3x faster than two-phase locking for some workloads.

• Parallel Snapshot Isolation (PSI): This one's about cutting latency in geo-distributed setups. Facebook's Async PSI slashed latency by 40% compared to standard snapshot isolation.

Progress in consensus algorithms

Consensus algorithms are the backbone of distributed transaction management:

Algorithm	What's cool about it	Who's using it
Raft	Easy to understand	etcd in Kubernetes
Paxos	Handles failures well	Google's Chubby lock service
Proof of Stake	Saves energy	Ethereum 2.0

Raft, born in 2013, is gaining fans because it's simple. Etcd, which uses Raft, handles over 1 billion requests daily in big Kubernetes clusters.

Cloud-native effects

Cloud platforms are shaking things up:

• Serverless databases: Amazon Aurora Serverless v2 scales to hundreds of thousands of transactions in the blink of an eye, tweaking isolation levels on the fly.

• Multi-tenant isolation: Google Cloud Spanner uses its TrueTime API for consistent global transactions, keeping tenants separate.

"Cloud-native architectures are pushing us to rethink isolation strategies, balancing consistency and performance in new ways."

Real-world isolation level examples

Let's see how companies use isolation levels in their databases:

Success stories

1. YugabyteDB's performance boost

YugabyteDB found SNAPSHOT isolation often matches SERIALIZABLE:

• Simple inserts: 45,000 writes/second for both
• Latency: 4.5-6ms for both

This shows a lower isolation level can sometimes perform like stricter ones.

2. CockroachDB's consistency focus

CockroachDB only uses SERIALIZABLE isolation. This:

• Keeps data consistent across nodes
• Removes the need for developers to choose levels

3. Amazon Aurora's secondary index edge

Aurora excels at secondary index inserts because it:

• Processes writes at one node
• Skips network RPCs
• Result? Faster performance for this specific task

Key learnings

1. Balance isolation and performance

YugabyteDB's case shows SNAPSHOT isolation can work well:

Isolation Level	Throughput	Latency
SERIALIZABLE	45K w/s	4.5-6ms
SNAPSHOT	45K w/s	4.5-6ms

Tip: Test different levels to find what works for your workload.

2. Consider your app's needs

An anonymous contributor said:

"Most people don't need high levels of isolation. Most people aren't doing payments."

Tip: Don't just pick the highest level. Think about what your app really needs.

3. Know your database's behavior

Databases handle isolation levels differently:

• PostgreSQL treats READ UNCOMMITTED as READ COMMITTED
• Oracle and Amazon Aurora default to READ COMMITTED

Tip: Understand how your database deals with isolation to avoid surprises.

4. Be ready for conflicts

When using optimistic concurrency control:

• Prepare to handle serialization failures
• Add retry logic to your app

Here's a PostgreSQL example to prevent lost updates:

BEGIN;
SELECT * FROM player WHERE id = 42 FOR UPDATE;
-- game logic here
UPDATE player SET score = 853 WHERE id = 42;
COMMIT;

Isolation levels in popular databases

Distributed databases handle transaction isolation differently. Let's compare how some well-known systems approach this.

Database	Max Isolation Level	Default Level	Min Level	Consensus Architecture	Key Limitations
Fauna	Strict serializability	Snapshot	Strict serializability (for certain transactions)	Calvin with optimistic concurrency	Writes coordinate on local log leaders
Google Cloud Spanner	Strict serializability	Strict serializability	Strict serializability	Spanner	Remote partition leaders for writes
FoundationDB	Strict serializability	Strict serializability	Strict serializability	Modified Percolator	All queries use timestamp oracle
CockroachDB	Serializable	Serializable	Serializable	Modified Spanner	Clock skew can violate isolation
Yugabyte	Snapshot	Snapshot	Snapshot	Spanner	Clock skew can violate isolation
TiDB	Repeatable read	Repeatable read	Repeatable read	Percolator	All queries use timestamp oracle
DynamoDB	Strong partition serializability	Read committed	Read committed	Paxos	Limited multi-partition transactions
CosmosDB	Strong partition serializability	Varies by configuration	Read uncommitted	Paxos	No multi-partition transactions
Cassandra	Strong partition serializability	Read uncommitted	Read uncommitted	Single-decree Paxos	No multi-partition transactions
MongoDB	Session causality	Read uncommitted	Read uncommitted	Sharded, semi-synchronous replication	No multi-partition transactions

What does this tell us?

1. Strict serializability is king for some (Fauna, Google Cloud Spanner, FoundationDB).
2. Default levels? All over the map.
3. Consensus protocols vary (Calvin, Spanner, Paxos).
4. Multi-partition transactions? Not everyone's cup of tea.

Take CockroachDB. They're all in on serializable isolation. It's simple for devs but might hit performance in some cases.

YugabyteDB? They're team snapshot isolation. They claim:

For simple inserts, both Serializable and Snapshot isolation levels hit 45K writes/sec with 4.5ms to 6ms latencies.

So, sometimes lower isolation doesn't mean worse performance.

Choosing a database and isolation level? Consider:

1. What your app REALLY needs. As someone put it:

"Most people don't need high levels of isolation. Most people aren't doing payments."

2. Performance trade-offs. Higher isolation often means slower performance. Test it out.

3. Database quirks. PostgreSQL treats READ UNCOMMITTED as READ COMMITTED. Oracle and Amazon Aurora default to READ COMMITTED.

Bottom line? Know your needs, test your options, and understand your database's quirks.

Future outlook

The future of transaction isolation in distributed databases is changing fast. Here's what's coming:

AI and new isolation levels

AI is set to shake things up:

• It could pick the best isolation levels automatically
• It might stop conflicts before they happen
• It could change isolation strategies on the fly

We'll likely see new isolation levels too:

• Hybrid levels that mix existing ones
• Levels that change based on what the transaction is doing
• Levels that use probabilities for specific cases

Blockchain and cloud impact

Blockchain tech is going to affect how we manage transactions:

• It could lead to decentralized transaction checking
• It might give us unchangeable transaction logs
• It could use smart contracts to enforce isolation

Cloud-native databases are changing the game too:

• FaunaDB offers strong consistency in the cloud
• Serverless databases like PlanetScale and SupaBase are getting popular

These might lead to new isolation strategies made for the cloud.

Hardware and edge computing

New hardware could change how we do isolation:

• We might get special processors just for managing transactions
• In-memory computing could spot conflicts faster
• Quantum computing might handle complex isolation scenarios

With more data being processed at the edge, we could see:

• Isolation strategies that work locally
• New ways to keep data consistent between the edge and the cloud
• Isolation levels that work even when connections are spotty

But remember, not everyone needs super-high isolation. As one expert said:

"Most people don't need high levels of isolation. Most people aren't doing payments."

The key is finding the right mix of consistency, speed, and scalability for each specific case.

Wrap-up

Transaction isolation levels are crucial for managing data in distributed databases. Here's what you need to know:

• There are four standard levels: Read Uncommitted, Read Committed, Repeatable Read, and Serializable.
• Higher levels protect data better but slow things down. Lower levels are faster but riskier.
• Your app's needs determine the right level. As Martin Kleppmann says:

"The choice of isolation level is not just a performance tuning parameter, but a fundamental design decision that affects the correctness of your application."

• Isolation levels impact performance. Here's a quick breakdown:

Isolation Level	Dirty Reads	Lost Updates	Non-repeatable Reads	Phantoms
Read Uncommitted	May occur	May occur	May occur	May occur
Read Committed	Don't occur	May occur	May occur	May occur
Repeatable Read	Don't occur	Don't occur	Don't occur	May occur
Serializable	Don't occur	Don't occur	Don't occur	Don't occur

• Distributed systems make isolation tricky.
• AI and blockchain are changing the game. FaunaDB, for example, now offers strong consistency in the cloud.
• Check your code to avoid bugs when relaxing isolation. Watch out for deadlocks with higher levels.

Most apps don't need the highest isolation. As one expert put it:

"Most people don't need high levels of isolation. Most people aren't doing payments."

Find the sweet spot for your use case, balancing data integrity, speed, and transaction types.

FAQs

What are the ACID properties of distributed systems?

ACID stands for Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, and Durability. These properties are crucial for reliable transactions in distributed databases:

Property	Description
Atomicity	Transaction parts succeed or fail together
Consistency	Data stays valid before and after transactions
Isolation	Concurrent transactions don't interfere
Durability	Completed transactions persist through failures

Maintaining ACID in distributed systems is tough. Why? Network issues and data partitioning get in the way.

Enter the CAP theorem. It says distributed systems can only guarantee two out of three: Consistency, Availability, and Partition Tolerance.

So, what's the deal? You've got to choose between consistency and availability during network partitions. It's not one-size-fits-all:

"The choice between consistency and availability depends on your specific use case and business needs."

Think about it:

• Banks? They'll pick consistency. Accurate transactions are a MUST.
• Social media? They'll lean towards availability. Keep those users scrolling!

Bottom line: If you're working with distributed databases, you NEED to understand ACID. It's not just tech jargon - it's the key to building systems that work when it matters most.

Related posts

• Circuit Breaker Pattern in Service Mesh: Guide
• 10 Real-Time Data Sync Best Practices 2024
• Distributed Data Consistency: Challenges & Solutions
• Two-Phase Commit Protocol Explained