Performance Analysis of Algorithms to Reason about XML Keys

  • Flavio Ferrarotti
  • Sven Hartmann
  • Sebastian Link
  • Mauricio Marin
  • Emir Muñoz
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7446)


Keys are fundamental for database management, independently of the particular data model used. In particular, several notions of XML keys have been proposed over the last decade, and their expressiveness and computational properties have been analyzed in theory. In practice, however, expressive notions of XML keys with good reasoning capabilities have been widely ignored. In this paper we present an efficient implementation of an algorithm that decides the implication problem for a tractable and expressive class of XML keys. We also evaluate the performance of the proposed algorithm, demonstrating that reasoning about expressive notions of XML keys can be done efficiently in practice and scales well. Our work indicates that XML keys as those studied here have great potential for diverse areas such as schema design, query optimization, storage and updates, data exchange and integration. To exemplify this potential, we use the algorithm to calculate non-redundant covers for sets of XML keys, and show that these covers can significantly reduce the number of XML keys against which XML documents must be validated. This can result in enormous time savings.


Adjacency List Path Expression XPath Query Document Object Model Implication Problem 
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.
    Apparao, V., et al.: Document object model (DOM) level 1 specification, W3C recommendation (1998),
  2. 2.
    Arenas, M., Fan, W., Libkin, L.: What’s Hard about XML Schema Constraints? In: Hameurlain, A., Cicchetti, R., Traunmüller, R. (eds.) DEXA 2002. LNCS, vol. 2453, pp. 269–278. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Buneman, P., Davidson, S., Fan, W., Hara, C., Tan, W.: Keys for XML. Computer Networks 39(5), 473–487 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Buneman, P., Davidson, S., Fan, W., Hara, C., Tan, W.: Reasoning about keys for XML. Inf. Syst. 28(8), 1037–1063 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen, Y., Davidson, S., Zheng, Y.: Xkvalidator: a constraint validator for XML. In: CIKM 2002: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM CIKM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, pp. 446–452. ACM (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clark, J., DeRose, S.: XML path language (XPath) version 1.0, W3C recommendation (1999),
  7. 7.
    Ferrarotti, F., Hartmann, S., Link, S.: A Precious Class of Cardinality Constraints for Flexible XML Data Processing. In: Jeusfeld, M., Delcambre, L., Ling, T.-W. (eds.) ER 2011. LNCS, vol. 6998, pp. 175–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gottlob, G., Koch, C., Pichler, R.: Efficient algorithms for processing XPath queries. Trans. Database Syst. 30(2), 444–491 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hartmann, S., Link, S.: Efficient reasoning about a robust XML key fragment. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 34(2) (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hartmann, S., Link, S.: Numerical constraints on XML data. Inf. Comput. 208(5), 521–544 (2010)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jungnickel, D.: Graphs, Networks and Algorithms. Springer (1999)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu, Y., Yang, D., Tang, S., Wang, T., Gao, J.: Validating key constraints over XML document using XPath and structure checking. Future Generation Comp. Syst. 21(4), 583–595 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maier, D.: Minimum Covers in the Relational Database Model. J. ACM 27, 664–674 (1980)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Suciu, D.: XML Data Repository, University of Washington (2002),
  15. 15.
    Thompson, H., Beech, D., Maloney, M., Mendelsohn, N.: XML Schema Part 1: Structures Second Edition, W3C Recommendation (2004),

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Flavio Ferrarotti
    • 1
  • Sven Hartmann
    • 2
  • Sebastian Link
    • 3
  • Mauricio Marin
    • 4
  • Emir Muñoz
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Victoria University of WellingtonNew Zealand
  2. 2.Clausthal University of TechnologyGermany
  3. 3.The University of AucklandNew Zealand
  4. 4.Yahoo! ResearchChile
  5. 5.University of Santiago de ChileChile

Personalised recommendations