Views and decompositions of databases from a categorical perspective

  • Chris Tuijn
  • Marc Gyssens
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 646)

Abstract

Since the introduction of the relational database model, a lot of efforts have been spent to describe conditions under which data decompositions can be achieved. In the past, these conditions were expressed in terms of dependencies. Here, we encapsulate more recent approaches based on partitioning in a categorical framework in order to obtain a very general context to study views and decomposition that is also applicable to complex-object models. Thereto, we use the categorical notion of presheaf. We argue that our model provides a more fundamental perspective on the concept of object-orientedness which compared to relational theory has developed in a rather adhoc manner. In particular, we show that the notion of sheaf yields a characterization for the presence of object-identity.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Alagić S. and Alagić M., Joins as Pullbacks, Proceedings of Third Workshop on Foundations of Models and Languages for Data and Objects, Aigen, 1991, pp. 197–207Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Abiteboul S. and Kanellakis P.C., Object Identity as a Query Language Primitive, Proceedings of the 1989 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on the Management of Data, ACM, 1989, pp. 159–173Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Arbib M.A. and Manes E.G., Arrows, Structures and Functors, Academic Press, New-York, 1975Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Atkinson M. et al., The Object-Oriented Database System Manifesto, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Deductive and Object-Oriented Databases, Kyoto, 1989, pp. 40–57Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Barr M. and Wells C., Category Theory for Computing Science, Prentice Hall, 1990Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Barr M. and Wells C., Toposes, Triples and Theories, Springer-Verlag, New-York, 1985Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Bell J.L., Categories, Toposes and Sets, D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, 1982Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Beeri C., Fagin R., Maier D., Mendelzon A.O., Ullman J.D., Yannakakis M., Properties of Acyclic Database Schemes, Proceedings of the 13th Ann. ACM Symp. on the Theory of Computing, 1981, pp. 355–362Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Cardelli L., A Semantics of Multiple Inheritance, Semantics of Data Types, Lecture Notes of Computer Science 173, Springer-Verlag, 1984Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Cosmadakis S.S., Kanellakis P.C., Spyratos N., Partition Semantics for Relations, Proceedings of the 4 th Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, ACM, 1985, pp. 261–275Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Codd E.F., A Relational Model of Data for Large Shared Data Banks, Communications of ACM, 13:6, 1970, pp. 377–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    De Bra P., Paredaens J., Conditional Dependencies for Horizontal Decompositions, Proceedings of the 10 th ICALP, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Volume 154, Springer-Verlag, 1983, pp. 67–82Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Fagin R., Yardi M.Y., The Theory of Data Dependencies—An Overview, Proceedings of the 11 th ICALP, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Volume 172, Springer-Verlag, 1984, pp. 1–22Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Gyssens M. and Paredaens J., A Graph-Oriented Object Model for Database End-User Interfaces, Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, Atlantic City, 1990Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Hegner S.J., Pairwise-Definable Subdirect Decompositions of General Database Schemata, Proceedings of the Symposium on Mathematical Fundamentals of Database Systems, Rostock, 1991Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Lee T.T., An Algebraic Theory of Relational Databases, The Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 63, nr. 10, 1983Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Özsoyoğlu Z.M., Yuan L.-Y., On the Normalization in Nested Relational Databases, in Nested Relations and Complex Objects in Databases, Abiteboul S., Fischer P.C., Schek H.-J., Eds., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Volume 361, Springer-Verlag, 1989, pp. 243–271Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Paredaens J., De Bra P., Gyssens M. and Van Gucht, D., The Structure of the Relational Database Model, EATCS Monographs on Theoretical Computer Science, Volume 17, Springer-Verlag, 1989Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Schek H.-J., Scholl M.H., The Relational Model with Relation-Valued Attributes, Information Systems, 11(2), 1986, pp. 137–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Scholl M.H., Laasch C. and Tresch M., Updatable Views in Object-Oriented Databases, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Deductive and Object-Oriented Databases, Munich, 1991, pp. 189–207Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Thomas S.J., Fischer P.C., Nested Relational Structures, The Theory of Databases, Advances in Computer Research III, P.C. Kanellakis, ed., JAI PRESS, Greenwich, CT, 1986, pp. 269–307Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Tuijn C., Gyssens M. and Paredaens J., A Categorical Approach to Object-Oriented Data Modeling, Proceedings of Third Workshop on Foundations of Models and Languages for Data and Objects, Aigen, 1991, pp. 187–196Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Weddel G.E., Coburn N., Path Constraints for Graph-Based Data Models: Towards a Unified Theory of Typing Constraints, Equations and Functional Dependencies, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Deductive and Object-Oriented Databases, Munich, 1991, pp. 312–331Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chris Tuijn
    • 1
  • Marc Gyssens
    • 2
  1. 1.Agfa-GevaertEdegemBelgium
  2. 2.University of Limburg (LUC)DiepenbeekBelgium

Personalised recommendations