Advertisement

Multilevel schema integration

  • Giuseppe Santucci
  • Carlo Batini
  • Giuseppe Di Battista
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 823)

Abstract

We present a methodology for data schema integration, able to merge a set of schemas and the top-down chains of refinement planes produced during their design. The result of this process, that we call multilevel integration, is an integrated schema plus an associated top-down chain of schemas. The integrated schema and the chain are related to the input schemas by nice properties, giving rise to a two-dimensional structure that we call grid. The methodology we define is based on the formal definition of schema refinement and on the notion of schema transformation, i.e., a replacement mechanism that maps a schema into another one. In particular we concentrate on sequences of transformations, constituting the formal counterpart of a chain of refinement. The overall generation process is summarized through the notion of abstraction tree, a useful tool for discovering and solving the conflicts arising during the multilevel integration activity.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    S.B. Navathe, S.G. Gadgil-A Methodology for View Integration in Logical Database Design-8th Itl. Conference on Very Large Data Bases, Mexico City, September 1982, pp. 142–164.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    C. Batini, M. Lenzerini-A methodology for data schema integration in the Entity Relationship model-IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, November 1984Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    W. Gottard, P. Lockemann, A. Neufeld-System-Guided View Integration for Object-Oriented Databases-IEEE Transactions on KDE, Vol. 4, N. 1, February 1992, pp. 1–22.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    C. Batini, M. Lenzerini, S. Navathe-A Comparative Analysis of Methodologies for database Schema Integration-ACM Computing Surveys, September 1986, pp. 323–364.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    A. Sheth, J.A.Larson, A.Cornelio, S.Navathe-A Tool for Integrating Conceptual Schemas and User Views-Proc. 4th Int'l. Conf. on Data Engineering, 1988Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, Y Dûpont-Automating Heterogeneous Schema Integration-Techincal Report, Laboratorie de Bases de Donnees, Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, 1991.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    P.Johannesson-A Logic Based Approach to Schema Integration-Proc. of 10th Itl. Conference on the Entity Relationship Approach, San Mateo, 1991Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    A.P.Sheth, H.Marcus-Schema Analysis and Integration: Methodology, Techniques, and Prototype Toolkit-Technical Memorandum: TM-STS-019981/1, Bellcore 1992.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    S. Spaccapietra, C. Parent, Y Dupont, “Model Independant Assertions for Integration of Heterogeneous Schemas”, VLDB Journal, 1, 92Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    P. Buneman, S. Davidson, A. Kosky, “Theoretical Aspects of Schema Merging”, Proceedings of 3rd Itl. Conference on Extending Database Technology, March 92Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    C. Francalanci, B. Pernici, “Object-Oriented view integration to support reuse of requirement specifications”, Proceedings of the Second Int. Computer Science Conference (ICSC), Hong Kong, Dec 92Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    C. Batini, S. Ceri, S.B. Navathe-Conceptual Database Design: an Entity Relationship Approach-Benjamin & Cummings Publishing Company, 1991.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    C. Batini, G. Di Battista-A Methodology for Conceptual Documentation and Maintenance-Information Systems, Vol 13, N. 3, 1988, pp. 297–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    T. Teorey, G. Wei, D. Bolton, J. Koenig-ER Model clustering as an aid for user communication and documentation in database design-Communications of the ACM, Vol. 32, N. 8, 1989, pp. 975–987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Index Technology Corp.-Excelerator-In Proc. CASE Symposium, Digital Consulting, 1987.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    B. Pace-Learn-As-You-Go CASE (POSE)-System Builder, 1989.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    H.K.T.Wong and I.Kuo-GUIDE: Graphical User Interface for Database Exploration-Proc. 8th Int. Conference on Very Large Data Bases, Mexico City, Sept. 1982.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    M. Angelaccio, T. Catarci, G. Santucci: QBD*: a graphical query language with recursion-IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering, Vol. 16, N. 10, 1990, pp.1150–1163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    C.Batini, G.Di Battista, G.Santucci-Structuring Primitives for a Dictionary of Entity Relationship Data Schemas-IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 19 No.4.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    J. Winkler-The Entity Relationship approach and the Information Resource Dictionary system standard-Proc. of 7h Int Conference on the Entity Relationship Approach, 1989.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    G.Di Battista, M.Lenzerini-A Deductive Method for Entity-Relationship Modeling-IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, to appear, 1992.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    A. Rosenthal, D. Reiner-Theoretically sound transformations for practical database design-In Proceedings of the 6th Itl. Conference on Entity Relationship Approach, New York, 1987.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    C. Batini et al.-Methodological reference framework for the design of information systems in public administrations-Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato, 1990 (in italian).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giuseppe Santucci
    • 1
  • Carlo Batini
    • 1
  • Giuseppe Di Battista
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Informatica e SistemisticaUniversité di Roma “La Sapienza”RomaItaly

Personalised recommendations