Advertisement

SCOOTER: A Compact and Scalable Dynamic Labeling Scheme for XML Updates

  • Martin F. O’Connor
  • Mark Roantree
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7446)

Abstract

Although dynamic labeling schemes for XML have been the focus of recent research activity, there are significant challenges still to be overcome. In particular, though there are labeling schemes that ensure a compact label representation when creating an XML document, when the document is subject to repeated and arbitrary deletions and insertions, the labels grow rapidly and consequently have a significant impact on query and update performance. We review the outstanding issues to-date and in this paper we propose SCOOTER - a new dynamic labeling scheme for XML. The new labeling scheme can completely avoid relabeling existing labels. In particular, SCOOTER can handle frequently skewed insertions gracefully. Theoretical analysis and experimental results confirm the scalability, compact representation, efficient growth rate and performance of SCOOTER in comparison to existing dynamic labeling schemes.

Keywords

Scalable Dynamic Node Label Increment Algorithm Document Initialisation Label Size 
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.
    Amagasa, T., Yoshikawa, M., Uemura, S.: QRS: A Robust Numbering Scheme for XML Documents. In: ICDE, pp. 705–707 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cohen, E., Kaplan, H., Milo, T.: Labeling Dynamic XML trees. In: PODS, pp. 271–281. ACM, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Duong, M., Zhang, Y.: LSDX: A New Labelling Scheme for Dynamically Updating XML Data. In: ADC, pp. 185–193 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Härder, T., Haustein, M.P., Mathis, C., Wagner, M.: Node Labeling Schemes for Dynamic XML Documents Reconsidered. Data Knowl. Eng. 60(1), 126–149 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hayes, B.: Third Base. American Scientist 89(6), 490–494 (2001)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kay, M.: Ten Reasons Why Saxon XQuery is Fast. IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 31(4), 65–74 (2008)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kobayashi, K., Liang, W., Kobayashi, D., Watanabe, A., Yokota, H.: VLEI code: An Efficient Labeling Method for Handling XML Documents in an RDB. In: ICDE, pp. 386–387 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Li, C., Ling, T.-W.: An Improved Prefix Labeling Scheme: A Binary String Approach for Dynamic Ordered XML. In: Zhou, L.-Z., Ooi, B.-C., Meng, X. (eds.) DASFAA 2005. LNCS, vol. 3453, pp. 125–137. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Li, C., Ling, T.W.: QED: A Novel Quaternary Encoding to Completely Avoid Re-labeling in XML Updates. In: CIKM, pp. 501–508 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li, C., Ling, T.W., Hu, M.: Efficient Updates in Dynamic XML Data: from Binary String to Quaternary String. VLDB Journal 17(3), 573–601 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li, Q., Moon, B.: Indexing and Querying XML Data for Regular Path Expressions. In: VLDB, pp. 361–370 (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    O’Connor, M.F., Roantree, M.: Desirable Properties for XML Update Mechanisms. In: EDBT/ICDT Workshops (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    O’Connor, M.F., Roantree, M.: EBSL: Supporting Deleted Node Label Reuse in XML. In: Lee, M.L., Yu, J.X., Bellahsène, Z., Unland, R. (eds.) XSym 2010. LNCS, vol. 6309, pp. 73–87. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    O’Neil, P.E., O’Neil, E.J., Pal, S., Cseri, I., Schaller, G., Westbury, N.: ORDPATHs: Insert-Friendly XML Node Labels. In: SIGMOD Conference, pp. 903–908 (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sans, V., Laurent, D.: Prefix based Numbering Schemes for XML: Techniques, Applications and Performances. PVLDB 1(2), 1564–1573 (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Su-Cheng, H., Chien-Sing, L.: Node Labeling Schemes in XML Query Optimization: A Survey and Trends. IETE Technical Review 26, 88–100 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tatarinov, I., Viglas, S., Beyer, K.S., Shanmugasundaram, J., Shekita, E.J., Zhang, C.: Storing and Querying Ordered XML using a Relational Database System. In: SIGMOD Conference, pp. 204–215 (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wu, X., Lee, M.L., Hsu, W.: A Prime Number Labeling Scheme for Dynamic Ordered XML Trees. In: ICDE, pp. 66–78 (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Xu, L., Bao, Z., Ling, T.-W.: A Dynamic Labeling Scheme Using Vectors. In: Wagner, R., Revell, N., Pernul, G. (eds.) DEXA 2007. LNCS, vol. 4653, pp. 130–140. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Xu, L., Ling, T.W., Wu, H., Bao, Z.: DDE: From Dewey to a Fully Dynamic XML Labeling Scheme. In: SIGMOD Conference, pp. 719–730 (2009)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yergeau, F.: UTF-8, A Transformation Format of ISO 10646, Request for Comments (RFC) 3629 edn. (November 2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin F. O’Connor
    • 1
  • Mark Roantree
    • 1
  1. 1.Interoperable Systems Group, School of ComputingDublin City UniversityDublin 9Ireland

Personalised recommendations