"Wound-wait" scheme: It is based on a preemptive method. It is based on a simple rule:

                  If Ti requests a database resource that is held by Tj

                   then if Ti has a larger timestamp (Ti is younger) than that of Tj 

                    it is allowed to wait;

     else Tj is wounded up by Ti.

For example, suppose that 3 transactions T1, T2 and T3 were generated in that series, then if T1requests for a data item which is presently held by transaction T2, then T2 is rolled back and data item is allotted to T1 as T1 has a smaller time stamping than that of T2. Though, if T3 requests for a data item which is presently held by transaction T2, then T3 is permitted to wait.

                                                   Figure: Wound-wait Scheme of Deadlock prevention

It is vital to see that whenever any transaction is rolled back, it would not make a starvation condition, i.e., no transaction gets rolled back repeatedly and is never permitted to make progress. Also both "wait-die" & "wound-wait" idea avoid starvation. The number of aborts & rollbacks will be higher in wait-die scheme than in the wound-wait idea. But one main problem with both of these ideas is that these ideas may result in unnecessary rollbacks.