Advertisement

A view of directions in relational database theory

  • Jeffrey D. Ullman
Session 5: E. Shamir, Chairman
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 115)

Abstract

We shall briefly survey what the author believes are some of the most fruitful directions in relational database theory. These directions include dependency inferences, support for the universal relation concept, null value semantics, and an exploration of the properties of acyclic database schemes.

References

  1. [ABU]
    Aho, A. V., C. Beeri, and J. D. Ullman, “The theory of joins in relational databases,” ACM Transactions on Database Systems 4:3 (1979), pp. 297–314.Google Scholar
  2. [BBG]
    Beeri, C., P. A. Bernstein, and N. Goodman, “A sophisticate's introduction to database normalization theory,” Proc. International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 113–124, 1978.Google Scholar
  3. [BFH]
    Beeri, C., R. Fagin, and J. H. Howard, “A complete axiomatization for functional and multivalued dependencies,” ACM SIGMOD International Symposium on Management of Data, pp. 47–61, 1977.Google Scholar
  4. [BFMY]
    Beeri, C., R. Fagin, D. Maier, and M. Yannakakis, “On the desirable properties of acyclic database schemas,” manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
  5. [BV1]
    Beeri, C. and M. Y. Vardi, “On the properties of join dependencies,” Proc. Workshop on Formal Bases for Databases, Toulouse, Dec., 1979.Google Scholar
  6. [BV2]
    Beeri, C. and M. Y. Vardi, “Complete axiomatizations for generalized dependencies,” Hebrew Univ., 1980.Google Scholar
  7. [B*]
    Beeri, C., R. Fagin, D. Maier, A. O. Mendelzon, J. D. Ullman, and M. Yannakakis, “Properties of acyclic database schemes,” to appear in Proc. 1981 ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing.Google Scholar
  8. [B]
    Bernstein, P. A., “Synthesizing third normal form relations from functional dependencies,” ACM Transactions on Database Systems 1:4 (1976), pp. 277–298.Google Scholar
  9. [BG1]
    Bernstein, P. A. and N. Goodman, “What does Boyce-Codd normal form do?,” Proc. International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, 1980.Google Scholar
  10. [BG2]
    Bernstein, P. A. and N. Goodman, “The theory of semijoins,” TR CCA-79-27, Computer Corp. of America, Cambridge, Mass., 1979.Google Scholar
  11. [CLM]
    Chandra, A. K., H. R. Lewis, and J. A. Makowsky, “Embedded implicational dependencies and their inference problem,” Harvard Univ., 1980.Google Scholar
  12. [C1]
    Codd, E. F., “A relational model for large shared data banks,” Comm. ACM 13:6 (1970), pp. 377–387.Google Scholar
  13. [C2]
    Codd, E. F., “Further normalization of the data base relational model,” in Data Base Systems (R. Rustin, ed.), Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., 1972.Google Scholar
  14. [F1]
    Fagin, R., “Multivalued dependencies and a new normal form for relational databases,” ACM Transactions on Database Systems 2:3 (1977), pp. 262–278.Google Scholar
  15. [F2]
    Fagin, R., “Horn clauses and database dependencies,” Proc. Twelfth Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pp. 123–134, 1981.Google Scholar
  16. [FMU]
    Fagin, R., A. O. Mendelzon, and J. D. Ullman, “A simplified universal relation assumption and its properties,” RJ2900, IBM, San Jose, Calif., 1980.Google Scholar
  17. [G]
    Graham, M. H., “On the universal relation,” technical report, Univ. of Toronto, Sept., 1979.Google Scholar
  18. [GZ]
    Ginsburg, S. and S. M. Zaiddan, “Properties of functional dependency databases,” Dept. of C. S., USC, 1980.Google Scholar
  19. [H]
    Honeyman, P., “Properties of the universal relation assumption,” Ph. D. thesis, Princeton Univ., Princeton, N. J., 1980.Google Scholar
  20. [K]
    Kent, W., “Consequences of assuming a universal relation,” IBM technical report, Dec., 1979, to appear in TODS.Google Scholar
  21. [KU]
    Korth, H. F. and J. D. Ullman, “SYSTEM/U: a database system based on the universal relation assumption,” Proc. XP1 Conference, Stonybrook, N. Y., June, 1980.Google Scholar
  22. [L1]
    Lien, Y. E., “On the equivalence of database models,” private communication, June, 1980.Google Scholar
  23. [L2]
    Lien, Y. E., “Multivalued dependencies with null values in relational data bases,” Proc. International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 61–66, 1979.Google Scholar
  24. [M]
    Maier, D., “Discarding the universal instance assumption: preliminary results,” Proc. XP1 Conference, Stonybrook, N. Y., June, 1980.Google Scholar
  25. [MU1]
    Maier, D. and J. D. Ullman, “Maximal objects and the semantics of universal relation databases,” TR-80-016, Dept. of C. S., SUNY, Stonybrook, N. Y., 1980.Google Scholar
  26. [MU2]
    Maier, D. and J. D. Ullman, “Paths in acyclic hypergraphs,” manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
  27. [MMS]
    Maier, D., Y. Sagiv, and A. O. Mendelzon, “Testing implications of data dependencies,” ACM Transactions on Database Systems 4:4 (1979), pp. 455–469.Google Scholar
  28. [P]
    Paredaens, J., “A universal formalism to express decompositions, functional dependencies, and other constraints in a relational database.” To appear in TCS. To appear, JACM.Google Scholar
  29. [PJ]
    Paredaens, J. and D. Jannsens, “Decomposition of relations: a comprehensive approach,” in Formal Bases for Databases (H. Gallaire and J.-M. Nicolas, eds.), CERT workshop, Toulouse, 1979.Google Scholar
  30. [R1]
    Rissanen, J., “Theory of joins for relational databases—a tutorial survey,” Proc. Seventh Symp. on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science, Lecture Notes in CS, 64, Springer-Verlag, pp. 537–551.Google Scholar
  31. [R2]
    Rissanen, J., “Independent components of relations,” ACM Transactions on Database Systems 2:4 (1977), pp. 317–325.Google Scholar
  32. [S1]
    Sciore, E., “Null values, updates, and normalization in relational databases,” doctoral dissertation, Princeton Univ., Princeton, N. J., 1980.Google Scholar
  33. [S2]
    Sciore, E., “A complete axiomatization for full join dependencies.” To appear in JACM.Google Scholar
  34. [SW]
    Sagiv, Y. and S. Walecka, “Subset dependencies as an alternative to embedded multivalued dependencies.” To appear in JACM.Google Scholar
  35. [SU1]
    Sadri, F. and J. D. Ullman, “A complete axiomatization for a large class of dependencies in relational databases,” Proc. Twelfth Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pp. 117–122, 1980.Google Scholar
  36. [SU2]
    Sadri, F. and J. D. Ullman, “The interaction between functional dependencies and template dependencies,” ACM SIGMOD International Symposium on Management of Data, pp. 45–51, 1980.Google Scholar
  37. [U]
    Ullman, J. D., Principles of Database Systems, Computer Science Press, Potomac, Md., 1980.Google Scholar
  38. [V]
    Vassilou, Y., “Null values in database management—a denotational semantics approach,” ACM SIGMOD International Symposium on Management of Data, pp. 162–169, 1979.Google Scholar
  39. [W]
    Walker, A., “Time and space in a lattice of universal relations with bank entries,” Proc. XP1 Conference, Stonybrook, N. Y., June, 1980.Google Scholar
  40. [Y]
    Yannakakis, M., “Properties of acyclic databases,” unpublished memorandum, Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, N. J., 1981.Google Scholar
  41. [YO]
    Yu, C. T. and M. Z. Ozsoyoglu, “An algorithm for tree-query membership of a distributed query,” Proc. Compsac-79, pp. 306–312, 1979.Google Scholar
  42. [YP]
    Yannakakis, M. and C. H. Papadimitriou, “Algebraic dependencies,” Proc. Twenty First Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 328–332, 1980.Google Scholar
  43. [Z]
    Zaniolo, C., “Analysis and design of relational schemata for database systems,” Ph. D. thesis, UCLA, 1976.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeffrey D. Ullman
    • 1
  1. 1.Stanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations