Advertisement

Selection of Materialized Views: A Cost-Based Approach

  • Xavier Baril
  • Zohra Bellahséne
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2681)

Abstract

Recently, multi-query optimization techniques have been considered as beneficial in view selection setting. The main interest of such techniques relies in detecting common sub expressions between the different queries of workload. This feature can be exploited for sharing updates and space storage. However, due to the reuse a query change may entail an important reorganization of the multi query graph. In this paper, we present an approach that is based on multi-query optimization for view selection and that attempts to reduce the drawbacks resulting from these techniques. Finally, we present a performance study using workloads consisting of queries over the schema of the TPC-H benchmark. This study shows that our view selection provides significant benefits over the other approaches.

Keywords

Query Processing Equivalence Node Access Frequency Query Graph Query Tree 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    S. Agrawal, S. Chaudhury, and V. Narasayya. Automated Selection of Materialized Views and Indexes for SQL Databases. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Very Large Databases, VLDB’2000, Cairo, Egypt, 2000.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Z. Bellahsène and P. Marot. Materializing a Set of Views: Dynamic Strategies and Performance Evaluation. In Proceedings of International Database Engineering and Applications Symposium, Yokohoma, Japan, September 2000. IEEE publishing.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. Chirkova, A. Halevy, and D. Suciu. A formal perspective on the view selection problem. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Very Large Databases, VLDB’2001, Roma, Italy, September 2001.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    H. Gupta. Selection of Views to Materialize in a DataWarehouse. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Database Theory, Delphi, Greece, January 1997.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. Gupta and I. Mumick. Selection of Views to Materialize Under a Maintenance-Time Constraint. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Database Theory, Jerusalem, Israel, January 1999.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Y. Kotidis and N. Roussopoulos. DynaMat: A Dynamic View Management System for Data Warehouses. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD Conference, Philadelphia, USA, 1999.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    H. Mistry, P. Roy, and K. Ramamritham. Materialized View Selection and Maintenance Using Multi-Query Optimization. In Proceeding of the International Conference on Management of Data SIGMOD, USA, 2001.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    P. Roy, S Seshadri, S. Sudarshan, and B. Siddhesh. Efficient and Extensible Algorithms for Multiquery Optimization. In Proceeding of the International Conference on Management of Data SIGMOD, San Diego, USA, 2000.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. Theodoratos and T. Sellis. Data warehouse configuration. In In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, VLDB’1997, 1997.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    D. Theodoratos and T. Sellis. Incremental Design. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, 15: 7–27, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    TPC-R Benchmark Standard Specification 2.01, January 1999. http://www.tpc.org.
  12. 12.
    J. Yang, K. Karlapalem, and Q. Li. Algorithm for Materialized View Design in data Warehousing Environment. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, VLDB’1997, pages 136–145, Athens, Greece, 1997.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xavier Baril
    • 1
  • Zohra Bellahséne
    • 1
  1. 1.LIRMM - UMR 5506CNRS/Université Montpellier IIMontpellier Cedex 5

Personalised recommendations