Advertisement

Evolving the Implementation of ISA Relationships in EER Schemas

  • Eladio Domínguez
  • Jorge Lloret
  • Ángel L. Rubio
  • María A. Zapata
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4231)

Abstract

One of the most severe problems related to database evolution is how to reflect in the data level the changes that have occurred in the conceptual schema of a database. This is specially relevant when evolution operations affect ISA relationships. In this paper we present our view of the evolution of ISA relationships, focusing on the artifacts that generate the sentences for changing the data in a consistent way.

Keywords

Logical Change Translation Component Translation Rule Logical Component Conceptual Component 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Al-Jadir, L., Léonard, M.: Multiobjects to Ease Schema Evolution in an OODBMS. In: Ling, T.-W., Ram, S., Li Lee, M. (eds.) ER 1998. LNCS, vol. 1507, pp. 316–333. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Claypool, K.T., Rundensteiner, E.A., Heineman, G.T.: ROVER: flexible yet consistent evolution of relationships. Data Knowl. Eng. 39(1), 27–50 (2001)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Domínguez, E., Lloret, J., Rubio, A.L., Zapata, M.A.: Elementary translations: the seesaws for achieving traceability between database schemata. In: [5], pp. 377–389 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Domínguez, E., Zapata, M.A.: Towards a Situational Method Engineering Technique. In: Information Systems (accepted for publication)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wang, S., et al. (eds.): ER Workshops 2004. LNCS, vol. 3289, pp. 349–456. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Elmasri, R.A., Navathe, S.B.: Fundamentals of Database Systems, 4th edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hainaut, J.L., Hick, J.M., Englebert, V., Henrard, J., Roland, D.: Understanding Implementations of IS-A Relations. In: Thalheim, B. (ed.) ER 1996. LNCS, vol. 1157, pp. 42–57. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rodríguez, E., Abelló, A., Oliva, M., Saltor, F., Delgado, C., Garvi, E., Samos, J.: On operations along the generalization/specialization dimension. In: Int. Workshop on Engineering Federated Information Systems, EFIS, pp. 70–83. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Roddick, J.: A survey of schema versioning issues for database systems. Information Software Technology 37(7), 383–393 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ram, S., Shankaranarayanan, G.: Research issues in database schema evolution: the road not taken, working paper # 2003-15 (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    OMG, UML 2.0 Superstructure Spec., formal/05-07-04 (2005), http://www.uml.org

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eladio Domínguez
    • 1
  • Jorge Lloret
    • 1
  • Ángel L. Rubio
    • 2
  • María A. Zapata
    • 1
  1. 1.Dpto. de Informática e Ingeniería de Sistemas., Facultad de Ciencias. Edificio de MatemáticasUniversidad de ZaragozaZaragozaSpain
  2. 2.Dpto. de Matemáticas y Computación. Edificio VivesUniversidad de La RiojaLogroñoSpain

Personalised recommendations