What is the significance of "commit points" in long-running transactions?

How can "snapshot isolation" help in managing concurrent transactions without resorting to traditional locks?

Consider the term "snapshot isolation" as an example for a database used by an airline. Is the selection of a strategy that does not lend itself to serialization suitable in the event that airlines are able to improve their overall performance?

Discuss the ACID properties (Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, Durability) in the context of distributed transactions. How are these properties maintained in a distributed environment?

In what ways does a strategy of avoiding deadlock differ from one of preventing deadlock?

Can you define a database's stable state? The symbolic significance of the transaction may differ from its actual occurrence in the database management system. To what extent would a prohibition be felt? Give an instance to illustrate your point. Is there really anything to "serializable transactions"?

Discuss two-phase commit (2PC) and three-phase commit (3PC) protocols in the context of distributed transactions. How do they ensure data consistency?

Suppose a transaction is written in C with embedded SQL, and about 80 percent of the time is spent in the SQL code, with the remaining 20 percent spent in C code. How much speedup can one hope to attain if parallelism is used only for the SQL code? Explain.

How does two-phase locking (2PL) work, and what are its advantages in managing concurrent transactions?

Describe the concept of two-phase commit (2PC) and three-phase commit (3PC) protocols in the context of distributed transactions. How do these protocols ensure transactional consistency in a distributed environment?