In database theory, what is the difference between \"conflict serializable\" and \"conflict equivalent\"?
My textbook has a section on conflict serializable but glosses
From Wikipedia.
The schedules S1
and S2
are said to be conflict-equivalent if the following conditions are satisfied:
Both schedules S1
and S2
involve the same set of transactions (including ordering of actions within each transaction).
The order of each pair of conflicting actions in S1
and S2
are the same.
A schedule is said to be conflict-serializable when the schedule is conflict-equivalent to one or more serial schedules.
Another definition for conflict-serializability is that a schedule is conflict-serializable if and only if its precedence graph/serializability graph, when only committed transactions are considered, is acyclic (if the graph is defined to include also uncommitted transactions, then cycles involving uncommitted transactions may occur without conflict serializability violation).