Extending a view mechanism to support schema evolution in federated database systems

  • Zohra Bellahsene
Federated Databases
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1308)


This paper discusses the impact of autonomy requirement on schema design in tightly coupled federated database systems. In a federated database system, an important feature of a schema evolution strategy should be how the conceptual autonomy can be preserved. The conceptual autonomy requirement states that evolution of a local schema should not affect the remote schemms. In this paper we propose a view mechanism enhanced with import/export facilities to support schema evolution enforcing the autonomy requirement. More precisely, some schema evolution operations having ability to entail incompatibility of existing programs with regard to the new schema will not actually performed but simulated by creating specific views. Our approach is concerned with preserving both remote schema from schema changes arising on a local schema and maintaining compatibility for local and remote existing programs.


Federated database systems conceptual autonomy view mechanism schema evolution virtual class 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    ABITEBOUL S., BONNER A. “Objects and Views”, in Proc. ACM SIGMOD, Conference on Management of Data, pp 238–247, Denver, Colorado, May, 1991.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    BANERJEE J., KIM W., KIM K.J., KORTH H., “Semantics and Implementation of Schema Evolution in Object-oriented databases”, in Proc. ACM SIGMOD Conference on Management of Data, San Francisco, 1987.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    BATINI C., LENZIRIN M. et NAVATHE S., “A Comparative Analysis of Methodologies for Database Schema Integration”, ACM Computer Surveys 18(4), pp. 323–364, December, 1986.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    BELLAHSENE Z., PONCELET P.,TEISSEIRE M., “ Views for Information Design without Reorganization”, in Proc. of CAiSE'96, International Conference on Advanced Information System Engineering, Crete 20–24 May, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, May, 1996.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    BELLAHSENE Z., “Views for Schema Evolution in Object-oriented Database Systems”, British National Conference on Database BNCOD-14”, Lectures Notes in Computer Science, Springer Verlag, Edinburgh, July, 1996.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    BERTINO E., "A View Mechanism for Object-oriented Database", 3rd International Conference on Extending Database Technology, March 23–24, Vienna (Austria), 1992.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    BERTINO E, “Integration of Heterogeneous data repositories by using object-oriented views”, in Proc. of the first International Workshop on Interoperability in Multidatabase Systems, April, 1991.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    CLAMEN S.M., “Schema Evolution and Integration”, Journal of Distributed and parallel Databases 2 (1994), pp. 101–126.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    FERRANDINA F., MEYER T., ZICARI R., G. FERRAN G., MADEC J., “Schema and Database Evolution in the 02 Object Database System”, in Proc. of VLDB Conference, Zurich, Switzerland, september, 1995.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    HEIMBIGNER D., D. MCLEOD, “A Federated Architecture for Information Management”, ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, 3(3), pp. 253–278, July, 1985.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    KIM W., CHOU H.T., “Versions of Schema for Object-Oriented Databases”, in Proc. of the 14th VLDB Conf., L.A., California, pp 148–159, 1988.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    KIM W., “Introduction to Object-Oriented Databases”, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England, 1990.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    LECLUSE C., RICHARD P., VELEZ F., “02, An Object Oriented Data Model”, in Proc of the ACM SIGMOD Conference on Management of Data, Chicago, June, 1988.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    LUCATO G., “Evolution de schema au travers des vues”, Rapport de DEA, University of Montpellier II, June 1995.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    MOTRO A., “Superviews: Virtual Integration of Multiple Databases”, IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, Vol. SE-13, N°7, July 1987, PP. 785–798.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    The 02 User Manual, 02Technology, 1994.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    RA Y.G., E. A., “A transparent object-oriented Schema Changes Approach Using View Evolution”, IEEE Int. Conf. on Data Engineering, Taipei, Taiwan, 1995.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    SIEGEL M., MADNICK S., "A Metadata Approach to Resolving Semantic Conflicts. In Proceedings of the 17th VLDB Conference, Barcelona, September, 1991.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    SHETH A.P, LARSON J.A., “Federated Databases Systems for Managing Distributed, Heterogeneous, and Autonomous Databases”, ACM Computer Surveys, 22(3):183–236, September, 1990.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    SPACCAPIETRA S., PARENT C., DUPONT Y., “ View integration: A Step Forward in Solving Structural Conflicts”, IEEE Transaction on Knowledge and Data Engineering, October, 1992.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    TRESCH M., SCHOLL M.H., “Schema Transformation without Database Reorganization”, in SIGMOD Record, 22(1), March 1993.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    TRESCH M., SCHOLL M. H., “ Schema Transformation Processors for Federated Object Bases”, in Proc. 3rd International Symposium on Database Systems for Advanced Applications (DASFAA), Daejon, Korea, April 1993.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    ZICARI R., “A framework for 02 Schema updates”, in Proc. of 7th IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering, PP. 146–182, April 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zohra Bellahsene
    • 1
  1. 1.LIRMM UMR 9928 CNRS-Montpellier IIMontpellier Cedex 5France

Personalised recommendations