Semantics of database transformations
- 107 Downloads
Database transformations arise in many different settings including database integration, evolution of database systems, and implementing user views and data-entry tools. This paper surveys approaches that have been taken to problems in these settings, assesses their strengths and weaknesses, and develops requirements on a formal model for specifying and implementing database transformations.
We also consider the problem of insuring the correctness of database transformations. In particular, we demonstrate that the usefulness of correctness conditions such as information preservation is hindered by the interactions of transformations and database constraints, and the limited expressive power of established database constraint languages. We conclude that more general notions of correctness are required, and that there is a need for a uniform formalism for expressing both database transformations and constraints, and reasoning about their interactions.
Finally we introduce WOL, a declarative language for specifying and implementing database transformations and constraints. We briefly describe the WOL language and its semantics, and argue that it addresses many of the requirements on a formalism for dealing with general database transformations.
KeywordsObject Identity European City Transformation Program Transformation Language Source Database
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.S. Abiteboul and P. Kanellakis. Object identity as a query language primitive. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD Conference on Management of Data, pages 159–173, Portland, Oregon, 1989.Google Scholar
- 4.F. Bancilhon. Object-oriented database systems. In Proceedings of 7th ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pages 152–162, Los Angeles, California, 1988.Google Scholar
- 6.C. Batini and M. Lenzerini. A methodology for data schema integration in the entity-relationship model. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-10(6):650–663, November 1984.Google Scholar
- 8.P. Buneman, S. Davidson, and A. Kosky. Theoretical aspects of schema merging. In LNCS 580: Advances in Database Technology — EDBT '9l, pages 152–167. Springer-Verlag, 1992.Google Scholar
- 9.S. B. Davidson, A. S. Kosky, and B. Eckman. Facilitating transformations in a human genome project database. In Proc. Third International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM), pages 423–432, December 1994.Google Scholar
- 10.U. Dayal and H. Hwang. View definition and generalisation for database integration in Multibase: A system for heterogeneous distributed databases. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-10(6):628–644, November 1994Google Scholar
- 11.C. Eick. A methodology for the deisgn and transformation of conceptual schemas. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Very Large Databases, Barcelona, Spain, pages 25–34, September 1991.Google Scholar
- 14.Dennis Heimbigner and Dennis McLeod. A federated architecture for information management. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, 3(3), July 1985.Google Scholar
- 18.Setrag N. Khoshafian and George P. Copeland. Object identity. In Stanley B. Zdonik and David Maier, editors, Readings in Object Oriented Database Systems, pages 37–46. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, California, 1990.Google Scholar
- 19.Anthony Kosky. Observational properties of databases with object identity. Technical Report MS-CIS-95-20, Dept. of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania, 1995.Google Scholar
- 20.Anthony Kosky. Transforming Databases with Recursive Data Structures. PhD thesis, Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, November 1995.Google Scholar
- 21.Anthony Kosky. Types with extents: On transforming and querying self-referential data-structures. PhD Thesis Proposal, Technical Report MS-CIS-95-21, University of Pennsylvania, May 1995.Google Scholar
- 23.R. J. Miller, Y. E. Ioannidis, and R Ramakrishnan. The use of information capacity in schema integration and translation. In Proc. 19th International VLDB Conference, pages 120–133, August 1993.Google Scholar
- 24.R. J. Miller, Y. E. Ioannidis, and R Ramakrishnan. Schema equivalence in heterogeneous systems: Bridging theory and practice. Information Systems, 19, 1994.Google Scholar
- 25.A. Motro. Superviews: Virtual integration of multiple databases. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, SE-13(7):785–798, July 1987.Google Scholar
- 26.S. Navathe, R. Elmasri, and J. Larson. Integrating user views in database design. IEEE Computer, 19(1):50–62, January 1986.Google Scholar
- 29.A. Rosenthal and D. Reiner. Theoretically sound transformations for practical database design. In S. T. March, editor, Entity-Relationship Approach, pages 115–131, 1988.Google Scholar
- 30.M. Rusinkiewicz, A. Sheth, and G. Karabatis. Specifying interdatabase dependencies in a multidatabase environment. IEEE Computer, December 1991.Google Scholar
- 33.Andrea H. Skarra and Stanley B. Zdonik. Type evolution in an object oriented database. In Bruce Shriver and Peter Wegner, editors, Research Directions in Object Oriented Programming, pages 392–415. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1987.Google Scholar
- 36.Jeffrey D. Ullman. Principles of Database and Knowledgebase Systems I. Computer Science Press, Rockville, MD 20850, 1989.Google Scholar
- 37.S. Widjojo, R. Hull, and D. S. Wile. A specificational approach to merging persistent object bases. In Al Dearle, Gail Shaw, and Stanley Zdonik, editors, Implementing Persistent Object Bases. Morgan Kaufmann, December 1990.Google Scholar
- 38.S. Widjojo, D. S. Wile, and R. Hull. Worldbase: A new approach to sharing distributed information. Technical report, USC/Information Sciences Institute, February 1990.Google Scholar
- 39.G. Wiederhold and X. Qian. Modeling asynchrony in distributed databases. Proc. 1987 International Conference on Data Engineering, pages 246–250, 1987.Google Scholar