Between Tree Patterns and Conjunctive Queries: Is There Tractability beyond Acyclicity?

  • Filip Murlak
  • Michał Ogiński
  • Marcin Przybyłko
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7464)

Abstract

In static analysis of queries over trees in the presence of schemas, there is an exponential complexity gap between conjunctive queries (CQs, positive existential first-order formulae without disjunction) and tree patterns (tree-like acyclic CQs). Motivated by applications in XML data management, we consider various restrictions of CQs that bring their complexity down to that of tree patterns. Most importantly, we show that vertical tree patterns can be costlessly extended with full horizontal CQs over children. We also consider restricted classes of schemas and show that under disjunction-free schemas the complexity of static analysis sometimes drops dramatically.

Keywords

Tree Pattern Conjunctive Query Tree Automaton Boolean Combination XPath Expression 
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Amano, S., David, C., Libkin, L., Murlak, F.: On the Tradeoff between Mapping and Querying Power in XML Data Exchange. In: ICDT, pp. 155–164 (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amano, S., Libkin, L., Murlak, F.: XML schema mapping. In: PODS, pp. 33–42 (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arenas, M., Libkin, L.: XML data exchange: consistency and query answering. J. ACM 55(2) (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Benedikt, M., Bourhis, P., Senellart, P.: Monadic Datalog Containment. In: Czumaj, A., Mehlhorn, K., Pitts, A., Wattenhofer, R. (eds.) ICALP 2012, Part II. LNCS, vol. 7392, pp. 79–91. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Benedikt, M., Fan, W., Geerts, F.: XPath satisfiability in the presence of DTDs. J. ACM 55(2) (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bex, G.J., Neven, F., Van den Bussche, J.: DTDs versus XML Schema: a practical study. In: WebDB, pp. 79–84 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Björklund, H., Gelade, W., Martens, W.: Incremental XPath evaluation. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 35(4), 29 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Björklund, H., Martens, W., Schwentick, T.: Conjunctive Query Containment over Trees. In: Arenas, M. (ed.) DBPL 2007. LNCS, vol. 4797, pp. 66–80. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Björklund, H., Martens, W., Schwentick, T.: Optimizing Conjunctive Queries over Trees Using Schema Information. In: Ochmański, E., Tyszkiewicz, J. (eds.) MFCS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5162, pp. 132–143. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bojańczyk, M., Kołodziejczyk, L.A., Murlak, F.: Solutions in XML data exchange. In: ICDT, pp. 102–113 (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    ten Cate, B., Lutz, C.: The Complexity of Query Containment in Expressive Fragments of XPath 2.0. J. ACM 56(6), 1–48Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chandra, A.K., Merlin, P.M.: Optimal implementation of conjunctive queries in relational data bases. In: STOC, pp. 77–90 (1977)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    David, C.: Complexity of Data Tree Patterns over XML Documents. In: Ochmański, E., Tyszkiewicz, J. (eds.) MFCS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5162, pp. 278–289. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    David, C., Libkin, L., Murlak, F.: Certain answers for XML queries. In: PODS, pp. 191–202 (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fagin, R., Kolaitis, P., Miller, R., Popa, L.: Data exchange: semantics and query answering. Theor. Comp. S. 336, 89–124 (2005)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gottlob, G., Koch, C., Schulz, K.: Conjunctive queries over trees. J. ACM 53, 238–272 (2006)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hidders, J.: Satisfiability of XPath Expressions. In: Lausen, G., Suciu, D. (eds.) DBPL 2003. LNCS, vol. 2921, pp. 21–36. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ishihara, Y., Morimoto, T., Shimizu, S., Hashimoto, K., Fujiwara, T.: A Tractable Subclass of DTDs for XPath Satisfiability with Sibling Axes. In: Gardner, P., Geerts, F. (eds.) DBPL 2009. LNCS, vol. 5708, pp. 68–83. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lenzerini, M.: Data integration: a theoretical perspective. In: PODS, pp. 233–246 (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Marx, M.: XPath with Conditional Axis Relations. In: Bertino, E., Christodoulakis, S., Plexousakis, D., Christophides, V., Koubarakis, M., Böhm, K. (eds.) EDBT 2004. LNCS, vol. 2992, pp. 477–494. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Miklau, G., Suciu, M.: Containment and equivalence for a fragment of XPath. J. ACM 51(1), 2–45 (2004)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Murata, M., Lee, D., Mani, M., Kawaguchi, K.: Taxonomy of XML schema languages using formal language theory. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology 5(4), 1–45 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Neven, F.: Automata Theory for XML Researchers. SIGMOD Record 31(3), 39–46 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Neven, F., Schwentick, T.: On the complexity of XPath containment in the presence of disjunction, DTDs, and variables. Logical Meth. in Comp. Sci. 2(3), 1–30 (2006)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wood, P.T.: Containment for XPath Fragments under DTD Constraints. In: Calvanese, D., Lenzerini, M., Motwani, R. (eds.) ICDT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2572, pp. 297–311. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Filip Murlak
    • 1
  • Michał Ogiński
    • 1
  • Marcin Przybyłko
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of InformaticsUniversity of WarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations