A Relaxed Approach to Integrity and Inconsistency in Databases

  • Hendrik Decker
  • Davide Martinenghi
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4246)


We demonstrate that many, though not all integrity checking methods are able to tolerate inconsistency, without having been aware of it. We show that it is possible to use them to beneficial effect and without further ado, not only for preserving integrity in consistent databases, but also in databases that violate their constraints. This apparently relaxed attitude toward integrity and inconsistency stands in contrast to approaches that are much more cautious wrt the prevention, identification, removal, repair and tolerance of inconsistent data that violate integrity. We assess several well-known methods in terms of inconsistency tolerance and give examples and counter-examples thereof.


Integrity Theory Integrity Constraint Deductive Database Query Answering Integrity Check 
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.
    Abiteboul, S., Hull, R., Vianu, V.: Foundations of Databases (1995)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arenas, M., Bertossi, L.E., Chomicki, J.: Consistent query answers in inconsistent databases. In: Proceedings of PODS, pp. 68–79. ACM Press, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bertossi, L.E., Chomicki, J.: Query answering in inconsistent databases. In: Logics for Emerging Applications of Databases, pp. 43–83 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ceri, S., Widom, J.: Deriving production rules for constraint maintainance. In: Proceedings of VLDB 1990, pp. 566–577. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1990)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chang, C.L., Lee, R.C.: Symbolic Logic and Mechanical Theorem Proving. Academic Press, London (1973)MATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Christiansen, H., Martinenghi, D.: Incremental integrity checking: Limitations and possibilities. In: Sutcliffe, G., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2005. LNCS, vol. 3835, pp. 712–727. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Christiansen, H., Martinenghi, D.: On simplification of database integrity constraints. Fundamenta Informaticae 71(4), 371–417 (2006)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Decker, H.: Integrity enforcement on deductive databases. In: Proceedings of EDS 1986, pp. 381–395. Benjamin/Cummings (1987)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Decker, H.: Translating advanced integrity checking technology to SQL. In: Database integrity: Challenges and solutions, pp. 203–249. Idea Group (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dong, G., Su, J.: Incremental Maintenance of Recursive Views Using Relational Calculus/SQL. SIGMOD Record 29(1), 44–51 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grant, J., Hunter, A.: Measuring inconsistency in knowledgebases. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems (in press)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grant, J., Minker, J.: Integrity constraints in knowledge based systems. In: Knowledge Engineering Vol II, Applications, pp. 1–25. McGraw-Hill, New York (1990)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gupta, A., Mumick, I.S. (eds.): Materialized views: Techniques, implementations, and applications. MIT Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gupta, A., Sagiv, Y., Ullman, J.D., Widom, J.: Constraint checking with partial information. In: Proceedings of PODS 1994, pp. 45–55. ACM Press, New York (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Henschen, L., McCune, W., Naqvi, S.: Compiling constraint-checking programs from first-order formulas. In: Advances In Database Theory, vol. 2, pp. 145–169. Plenum Press, New York (1984)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hsu, A., Imielinski, T.: Integrity checking for multiple updates. In: Navathe, S.B. (ed.) Proceedings of SIGMOD 1985, pp. 152–168. ACM Press, New York (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kowalski, R.A., Sadri, F., Soper, P.: Integrity checking in deductive databases. In: Proceedings of VLDB 1987, pp. 61–69. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1987)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee, S.Y., Ling, T.W.: Further improvements on integrity constraint checking for stratifiable deductive databases. In: VLDB 1996, pp. 495–505. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1996)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leuschel, M., de Schreye, D.: Creating specialised integrity checks through partial evaluation of meta-interpreters. JLP 36(2), 149–193 (1998)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lloyd, J.W., Sonenberg, L., Topor, R.W.: Integrity constraint checking in stratified databases. JLP 4(4), 331–343 (1987)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Martinenghi, D., Christiansen, H., Decker, H.: Integrity checking and maintenance in relational and deductive databases, and beyond. In: Ma, Z. (ed.) Intelligent Databases: Technologies and Applications, ch. X, page to appear. Idea Group Publishing (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nicolas, J.-M.: Logic for improving integrity checking in relational data bases. Acta Informatica 18, 227–253 (1982)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Olivé, A.: Integrity constraints checking in deductive databases. In: Proceedings of VLDB 1991, pp. 513–523. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1991)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Qian, X.: An effective method for integrity constraint simplification. In: ICDE 1988, pp. 338–345. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1988)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sadri, F., Kowalski, R.: A theorem-proving approach to database integrity. In: Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, pp. 313–362. Kaufmann, Los Altos (1988)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hendrik Decker
    • 1
  • Davide Martinenghi
    • 2
  1. 1.Instituto Tecnológico de InformáticaCiudad Politécnica de la InnovaciónValenciaSpain
  2. 2.Computer Science DepartmentFree University of Bozen/BolzanoBolzanoItaly

Personalised recommendations