Advertisement

Dynamic Data Mart for Business Intelligence

  • E. Chang
  • W. Rahayu
  • M. Diallo
  • M. Machizaud
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 465)

Abstract

Companies today have several major issues while managing information. Many subsidiaries and departments have developed their own Data Management which has led to a multitude of Operational Databases and sometimes a multitude of Data Marts, policies and processes. Thus, these systems lack sustainability because they are not dynamic and not self-organizing, and so they do not adapt to the continuous needs arising from evolution that the companies experience. The Dynamic Data Mart architecture is built around 6 main functions, namely the 3Ms (Data Mining, Data Marshalling and Data Meshing) and the 3Rs (Recommendation, Reconciliation and Representation), which will address the aforementioned problems. Once the totality of the data have been loaded into a single Data Warehouse, the Dynamics Data Marts address these problems by mining the user’s behavior and the user’s decision making processes and continuously and automatically adapting the Data Mart to the needs of the users. Dynamic Data Marts create adapted dimensions, facts, data associations and views and then automatically find the ones that are not used anymore. These latter are then automatically dropped by the system, or can be presented to the IT manager if needed for validation of their removal.

Keywords

Dynamic data mart Data integration Disparate data sources 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Rahayu, J.W., Chang, E., Dillon, T.S., Taniar, D.: Performance Evaluation of The Object-Relational transformation methodology. Data Knowledge Engineering 38(3), 265–300 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rahayu, J.W., Chang, E., Dillon, T.S., Taniar, D.: A methodology for transforming inheritance relationships in an object-oriented conceptual model to relational tables. Information & Software Technology 42(8), 571–592 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chan, H., Lee, R., Dillon, T., Chang, E.: E-commerce Principles and Practice. John Wiley and Sons, November 2001Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    The Microsoft Modern Data Warehouse, Microsoft Corporation (2013/2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Data Integration Architectures for Operational Data Warehousing. Oracle (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
    Data Virtualisation, Data Source (2013). http://datasourceconsulting.com/8-steps-data-virtualization/
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    SAP HANA and Data Virtualisation. SAP Technology (2012). http://stats.manticoretechnology.com/ImgHost/582/12917/2012/Resources/HANA-DV.pdf
  10. 10.
    Malinowski, E., Zimányi, E.: Logical Representation of a Conceptual Model for Spatial Data Warehouses. GeoInformatica 11(4), 431–457 (2007). SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fidalgo, R.N., Times, V.C., da Silva, J., Souza, F.F.: GeoDWFrame: a framework for guiding the design of geographical dimensional schemas. In: Kambayashi, Y., Mohania, M., Wöß, W. (eds.) DaWaK 2004. LNCS, vol. 3181, pp. 26–37. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Glorio, O., Mazón, J.-N., Garrigós, I., Trujillo, J.: A personalization process for spatial data warehouse development. Decision Support Systems (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stefanovic, N., Han, J., Koperski, K.: Object-Based Selective Materialization for Efficient Implementation of Spatial Data Cubes. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kern, R., Stolarczyk, T., Nguyen, N.T.: A formal framework for query decomposition and knowledge integration in data warehouse federations. Expert Systems Applications 40 (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jarke, M., List, T., Koller, J.: The Challenge of Process Data Warehousing. VLDB conference (2000)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gartner, Magic Quadrant Data Warehouse Data Management Solutions for Analytics (2015)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gartner, Magic Quadrant for Data Quality Tools (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    ThoughtWeb, Logical Data Warehousing for Big Data (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Data Integration Architectures for Operational Data Warehousing. Oracle (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  2. 2.La Trobe UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines d’AlbiAlbiFrance

Personalised recommendations