Minimizing View Sets without Losing Query-Answering Power

  • Chen Li
  • Mayank Bawa
  • Jeffrey D. Ullman
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1973)


The problem of answering queries using views has been studied extensively due to its relevance in a wide variety of data-management applications. In these applications, we often need to select a subset of views to maintain due to limited resources. In this paper, we show that traditional query containment is not a good basis for deciding whether or not a view should be selected. Instead, we should minimize the view set without losing its query-answering power. To formalize this notion, we first introduce the concept of “p-containment.” That is, a view set V is p-contained in another view set W, if W can answer all the queries that can be answered by V. We show that p-containment and the traditional query containment are not related. We then discuss how to minimize a view set while retaining its query-answering power. We develop the idea further by considering p-containment of two view sets with respect to a given set of queries, and consider their relationship in terms of maximally-contained rewritings of queries using the views.


Data Warehouse Base Relation Conjunctive Query Answering Query View Versus 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    S. Abiteboul and O. M. Duschka. Complexity of answering queries using materialized views. In PODS, pages 254–263, 1998.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    F. N. Afrati, M. Gergatsoulis, and T. G. Kavalieros. Answering queries using materialized views with disjunctions. In ICDT, pages 435–452, 1999.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    D. Calvanese, G. D. Giacomo, M. Lenzerini, and M. Y. Vardi. Query answering using views for data integration over the Web. WebDB, pages 73–78, 1999.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. Calvanese, G. D. Giacomo, M. Lenzerini, and M. Y. Vardi. What is view-based query rewriting. In KRDB, 2000.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. Ceri and J. Widom. Deriving production rules for incremental view maintenance. In Proc. of VLDB, 1991.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. K. Chandra and P. M. Merlin. Optimal implementation of conjunctive queries in relational data bases. STOC, pages 77–90, 1977.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R. Chirkova and M. R. Genesereth. Linearly bounded reformulations of conjunctive databases. DOOD, 2000.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. Cho and H. Garcia-Molina. Synchronizing a database to improve freshness. SIGMOD, 2000.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    O. M. Duschka. Query planning and optimization in information integration. Ph.D. Thesis, Computer Science Dept., Stanford Univ., 1997.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    O. M. Duschka and M. R. Genesereth. Answering recursive queries using views. In PODS, pages 109–116, 1997.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    D. Florescu, A. Y. Levy, D. Suciu, and K. Yagoub. Optimization of run-time management of data intensive web-sites. In Proc. of VLDB, pages 627–638, 1999.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    G. Grahne and A. O. Mendelzon. Tableau techniques for querying information sources through global schemas. In ICDT, pages 332–347, 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    S. Grumbach and L. Tininini. On the content of materialized aggregate views. In PODS, pages 47–57, 2000.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. Hammer, H. Garcia-Molina, J. Widom, W. Labio, and Y. Zhuge. The Stan ford Data Warehousing Project. In IEEE Data Eng. Bulletin, Special Issue on Materialized Views and Data Warehousing, 1995.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    W. H. Inmon and C. Kelley. Rdb/VMS: Developing the Data Warehouse. QED Publishing Group, Boston, Massachussetts, 1993.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    A. Levy. Answering queries using views: A survey. Technical report, Computer Science Dept., Washington Univ., 2000.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. Y. Levy, A. O. Mendelzon, Y. Sagiv, and D. Srivastava. Answering queries using views. In PODS, pages 95–104, 1995.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    A. Y. Levy, A. Rajaraman, and J. J. Ordille. Querying heterogeneous information sources using source descriptions. In Proc. of VLDB, pages 251–262, 1996.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    C. Li, M. Bawa, and J. D. Ullman. Minimizing view sets without losing query-answering power (extended version). Technical report, Computer Science Dept., Stanford Univ.,, 2000.
  20. 20.
    P. Mitra. An algorithm for answering queries effciently using views. In Technical Report, Stanford University, 1999.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    R. Pottinger and A. Levy. A scalable algorithm for answering queries using views. In Proc. of VLDB, 2000.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    X. Qian. Query folding. In ICDE, pages 48–55, 1996.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Y. Sagiv and M. Yannakakis. Equivalences among relational expressions with the union and difference operators. Journal of the ACM, 27(4):633–655, 1980.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    J. D. Ullman. Information integration using logical views. In ICDT, pages 19–40, 1997.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    J. Widom. Research problems in data warehousing. In Proc. of the Intl. Conf. on Information and Knowledge Management, 1995.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    G. Wiederhold. Mediators in the architecture of future information systems. IEEE Computer, 25(3):38–49, 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chen Li
    • 1
  • Mayank Bawa
    • 1
  • Jeffrey D. Ullman
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentStanford UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations