One-phase commit: does it make sense?

Although widely used in distributed transactional systems, the so-called Two-Phase Commit (2PC) protocol introduces a substantial delay in transaction processing, even in the absence of failures. This has led several researchers to look for alternative commit protocols that minimize the time cost associated with coordination messages and forced log writes in 2PC. In particular, variations of a One-Phase Commit (1PC) protocol have recently been proposed. Although efficient, 1PC is however rarely considered in practice because of the strong assumptions it requires from the distributed transactional system. The aim of the paper is to better identify and understand those assumptions. Through a careful look into the intrinsic characteristics of 1PC, we dissect the assumptions underlying it and we present simple techniques that minimize them. We believe that these techniques constitute a first step towards a serious reconsideration of 1PC in the transactional world.