Containment of Conjunctive Queries with Safe Negation

  • Fang Wei
  • Georg Lausen
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2572)

Abstract

We consider the problem of query containment for conjunctive queries with safe negated subgoals (CQ⌝s). We propose a new method for the containment test of CQ⌝s. Comparing to the previous known approach, which always requires an exponential number of canonical databases to be verified to prove that Q1Q2, the algorithm proposed in this paper exploits the containment mappings of their positive counterparts, and terminates once the specified test succeeds. We show that in the worst case, the algorithm has the same performance as the one proposed in previous work. We also extend our algorithm to unions of CQ⌝s in a natural way. Due to the close relation between query containment and answering queries using views, we give some notes on considering answering queries using views when both queries and views have safe negated subgoals.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    S. Abiteboul and O. M. Duschka. Complexity of answering queries using materialized views. In ACM Symp. on Principles of Database Systems (PODS), 1998.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. K. Chandra and P. M. Merlin. Optimal implementations of conjunctive queries in relational data bases. In ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 77–90. 1977.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    O. M. Duschka and A. Y. Levy. Recursive plans for information gathering. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pages 778–784, 1997.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. Flesca and S. Greco. Rewriting queries using views. In TKDE, 13(6), 2001.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    D. Florescu, A. Levy, and D. Suciu. Query containment for conjunctive queries with regular expressions. In ACM Symp. on Principles of Database Systems (PODS). 1998.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. Gupta, Y. Sagiv, J. D. Ullman, and J. Widom. Constraint checking with partial information. In ACM Symp. on Principles of Database Systems (PODS). 1994.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Halevy. Answering queries using views: A survey. In VLDB Journal, 10:4, pp. 270–294, 2001.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Klug. On conjunctive queries containing inequalities. In Journal of the ACM 35:1, pp. 146–160, 1988.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Y. Levy, A. O. Mendelzon, Y. Sagiv, and D. Srivastava. Answering queries using views. In ACM Symp. on Principles of Database Systems (PODS). 1995.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    A. Levy and Y. Sagiv. Queries independent of updates. In International Conference on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB), 1993.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    A. Levy and D. Suciu. Deciding containment for queries with complex objects. In ACM Symp. on Principles of Database Systems (PODS). ACM Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Y. Sagiv and M. Yannakakis. Equivalence among relational expressions with the union and difference operations. Journal of the ACM, (4), 27(4):633–655, 1980.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. Ullman. Principles of Database and KnowledgeBase Systems, Volume II. 1989.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. D. Ullman. Information integration using logical views. In International Conference on Database Theory (ICDT), 1997.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    X. Zhang and Z. Meral Özsoyoglu. On efficient reasoning with implication constraints. In DOOD, pages 236–252, 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fang Wei
    • 1
  • Georg Lausen
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Freiburg, Institute for Computer ScienceGermany

Personalised recommendations