Using UML’s Sequence Diagrams for Representing Execution Models Associated to Triggers

  • Harith T. Al-Jumaily
  • César de Pablo
  • Dolores Cuadra
  • Paloma Martínez
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4042)


Using active rules or triggers to verify integrity constraints is a serious and complex problem because these mechanisms have behaviour that could be difficult to predict in a complex database. The situation is even worse as there are few tools available for developing and verifying them. We believe that automatic support for trigger development and verification would help database developers to adopt triggers in the database design process. Therefore, in this work we suggest a visualization add-in tool that represents and verifies triggers execution by using UML’s sequence diagrams. This tool is added in RATIONAL ROSE and it simulates the execution sequence of a set of triggers when a DML operation is produced. This tool uses the SQL standard to express the triggers semantics and execution.


Sequence Diagram Integrity Constraint Execution Model Active Rule Case Tool 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Paton, W.N.: Active Rules in Database Systems. Springer, New York (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Norman, W.P., Diaz, O.: Active Database Systems. ACM Computing Surveys 31(1) (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ceri, S., Cochrane, R.J., Widom, J.: Practical Applications of Triggers and Constraints: Successes and Lingering Issues. In: Proc. of the 26th VLDB Conf., Cairo, Egypt (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Eisenberg, A., Melton, J., Kulkarni, K., Michels, J., Zemke, F.: SQL:2003 has been published. ACM SIGMOD Record, vol. 33(1) (March 2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Melton, J., Simon, A.R.: SQL: 1999 Understanding Relational Language Components. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hanson, E.N.: The Design and Implementations of Ariel Active Database Rule System. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 8(1) (February 1996)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dayal, U., Buchmann, A.P., Chakravarthy, S.: The HiPAC Project. In: Widom, J., Ceri, S. (eds.) Active database systems: triggers and rules for advanced database processing, pp. 177–205. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (1996)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Widom, J., Cochrane, R.J., Lindsay, B.G.: Implementing set-oriented production rules as an extension to Starburst. In: Proc. 7th International Conference on VLDB (September 1991)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kulkarni, K., Mattos, N., Cochrane, R.: Active Database Features in SQL3. In: Active Rules in Database Systems, pp. 197–218. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ceri, S., Fraternalli, P.: Designing database applications with objects and rules: the IDEA Methodology. Addsion-Wesley, Reading (1997)MATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Benazet, E., Guehl, H., Bouzeghoub, M.: VITAL a visual tool for analysis of rules behaviour in active databases. In: Sellis, T.K. (ed.) RIDS 1995. LNCS, vol. 985, pp. 182–196. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kappel, G., Kramler, G., Retschitzegger, W.: TriGS Debugger A Tool for Debugging Active Database Behavior. In: Mayr, H.C., Lazanský, J., Quirchmayr, G., Vogel, P. (eds.) DEXA 2001. LNCS, vol. 2113, p. 410. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Díaz, O., Jaime, A., Paton, N.: DEAR a DEbugger for Active Rules in an object-oriented context. In: Williams, M., Paton, N. (eds.) Rules In Database Systems. LNCS, pp. 180–193. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    AllFusion® ERwin® Data Modeler site,
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    Alexander, A., Jennifer, W.: Behavior of Database Production Rules: Termination, Confluence, and Observable Determinism. In: Proc. ACM-SIGMOD Conf. (1992)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Paton, N., Díaz, O.: Active Database Systems. ACM Computing Surveys 31(1) (1999)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hickey, T.: Constraint-Based Termination Analysis for Cyclic Active Database Rules. In: Palamidessi, C., Moniz Pereira, L., Lloyd, J.W., Dahl, V., Furbach, U., Kerber, M., Lau, K.-K., Sagiv, Y., Stuckey, P.J. (eds.) CL 2000. LNCS, vol. 1861, pp. 1121–1136. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vadaparty, K.: ODBMS - Bridging the Gap Between Objects and Tables: Object and Data Models 12(2) (1999)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Salo, T., Hill, J.: Mapping Objects to Relational Databases. Journal of Object Oriented Programming 13(1) (2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harith T. Al-Jumaily
    • 1
  • César de Pablo
    • 1
  • Dolores Cuadra
    • 1
  • Paloma Martínez
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentUniversidad Carlos III de Madrid 

Personalised recommendations