# Relaxed Notions of Schema Mapping Equivalence Revisited

- 197 Downloads
- 1 Citations

## Abstract

Recently, two relaxed notions of equivalence of schema mappings have been introduced, which provide more potential of optimizing schema mappings than logical equivalence: data exchange (DE) equivalence and conjunctive query (CQ) equivalence. In this work, we systematically investigate these notions of equivalence for mappings consisting of s-t tgds and target egds and/or target tgds. We prove that both CQ- and DE-equivalence are undecidable and so are some important optimization tasks (like detecting if some dependency is redundant). However, we also identify an important difference between the two notions of equivalence: CQ-equivalence remains undecidable even if the schema mappings consist of s-t tgds and target dependencies in the form of key dependencies only. In contrast, DE-equivalence is decidable for schema mappings with s-t tgds and target dependencies in the form of functional and inclusion dependencies with terminating chase property.

## Keywords

Data integration Schema mapping optimization Equivalence of schema mappings## References

- 1.Arenas, M., Fagin, R., Nash, A.: Composition with target constraints. In: Proc. ICDT’10. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, pp. 129–142. ACM, New York (2010) Google Scholar
- 2.Arenas, M., Pérez, J., Reutter, J.L., Riveros, C.: Inverting schema mappings: bridging the gap between theory and practice. PVLDB
**2**(1), 1018–1029 (2009) Google Scholar - 3.Arenas, M., Pérez, J., Reutter, J.L., Riveros, C.: Foundations of schema mapping management. In: Proc. PODS, pp. 227–238. ACM, New York (2010) Google Scholar
- 4.Arenas, M., Pérez, J., Riveros, C.: The recovery of a schema mapping: bringing exchanged data back. ACM Trans. Database Syst.
**34**(4) (2009) Google Scholar - 5.Beeri, C., Vardi, M.Y.: A proof procedure for data dependencies. J. ACM
**31**(4), 718–741 (1984) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 6.Bernstein, P.A.: Applying model management to classical meta data problems. In: Proc. CIDR’03 (2003). Available from http://www-db.cs.wisc.edu/cidr/cidr2003/program/p19.pdf Google Scholar
- 7.Bernstein, P.A., Green, T.J., Melnik, S., Nash, A.: Implementing mapping composition. VLDB J.
**17**(2), 333–353 (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 8.Bernstein, P.A., Melnik, S.: Model management 2.0: manipulating richer mappings. In: Proc. SIGMOD’07, pp. 1–12. ACM, New York (2007) Google Scholar
- 9.Deutsch, A., Nash, A., Remmel, J.B.: The chase revisited. In: Proc. PODS’08, pp. 149–158. ACM, New York (2008) Google Scholar
- 10.Deutsch, A., Tannen, V.: Xml queries and constraints, containment and reformulation. Theor. Comput. Sci.
**336**(1), 57–87 (2005) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 11.Duschka, O.M., Genesereth, M.R., Levy, A.Y.: Recursive query plans for data integration. J. Log. Program.
**43**(1), 49–73 (2000) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 12.Fagin, R.: Horn clauses and database dependencies. J. ACM
**29**(4), 952–985 (1982) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 13.Fagin, R.: Inverting schema mappings. ACM Trans. Database Syst.
**32**(4) (2007) Google Scholar - 14.Fagin, R., Kolaitis, P.G., Miller, R.J., Popa, L.: Data exchange: semantics and query answering. Theor. Comput. Sci.
**336**(1), 89–124 (2005) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 15.Fagin, R., Kolaitis, P.G., Nash, A., Popa, L.: Towards a theory of schema-mapping optimization. In: Proc. PODS’08, pp. 33–42. ACM, New York (2008) Google Scholar
- 16.Fagin, R., Kolaitis, P.G., Popa, L.: Data exchange: getting to the core. ACM Trans. Database Syst.
**30**(1), 174–210 (2005) CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 17.Fagin, R., Kolaitis, P.G., Popa, L., Tan, W.C.: Composing schema mappings: Second-order dependencies to the rescue. ACM Trans. Database Syst.
**30**(4), 994–1055 (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 18.Fagin, R., Kolaitis, P.G., Popa, L., Tan, W.C.: Quasi-inverses of schema mappings. ACM Trans. Database Syst.
**33**(2) (2008) Google Scholar - 19.Fagin, R., Kolaitis, P.G., Popa, L., Tan, W.C.: Reverse data exchange: coping with nulls. In: Proc. PODS’09, pp. 23–32. ACM, New York (2009) Google Scholar
- 20.Gottlob, G., Papadimitriou, C.H.: On the complexity of single-rule datalog queries. Inf. Comput.
**183**(1), 104–122 (2003) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 21.Gottlob, G., Pichler, R., Savenkov, V.: Normalization and optimization of schema mappings. PVLDB
**2**(1), 1102–1113 (2009) Google Scholar - 22.Halevy, A.Y., Rajaraman, A., Ordille, J.J.: Data integration: the teenage years. In: Proc. VLDB’06, pp. 9–16. ACM, New York (2006) Google Scholar
- 23.Johnson, D.S., Klug, A.C.: Testing containment of conjunctive queries under functional and inclusion dependencies. J. Comput. Syst. Sci.
**28**(1), 167–189 (1984) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 24.Kolaitis, P.G.: Schema mappings, data exchange, and metadata management. In: Proc. PODS’05, pp. 61–75. ACM, New York (2005) Google Scholar
- 25.Lenzerini, M.: Data integration: a theoretical perspective. In: Proc. PODS’02, pp. 233–246. ACM, New York (2002) Google Scholar
- 26.Madhavan, J., Halevy, A.Y.: Composing mappings among data sources. In: Proc. VLDB’03, pp. 572–583 (2003) Google Scholar
- 27.Marnette, B.: Generalized schema-mappings: from termination to tractability. In: PODS, pp. 13–22 (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Meier, M., Schmidt, M., Lausen, G.: On chase termination beyond stratification. PVLDB
**2**(1), 970–981 (2009) Google Scholar - 29.Melnik, S.: Generic Model Management: Concepts and Algorithms. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2967. Springer, Berlin (2004) MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.Nash, A., Bernstein, P.A., Melnik, S.: Composition of mappings given by embedded dependencies. ACM Trans. Database Syst.
**32**(1), 4 (2007) CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 31.Shmueli, O.: Equivalence of datalog queries is undecidable. J. Log. Program.
**15**(3), 231–241 (1993) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 32.Pichler, R., Savenkov, V.: Towards practical feasibility of core computation in data exchange. Theor. Comput. Sci.
**411**(7-9), 935–957 2010 MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 33.Feinerer, I., Pichler, R., Sallinger, E., Savenkov, V.: On the undecidability of the equivalence of second-order tuple generating dependencies. In: AMW (2011). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-749/paper5.pdf