skip to main content
10.1145/182591.182597acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespodsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

Constraint checking with partial information

Published:24 May 1994Publication History

ABSTRACT

Constraints are a valuable tool for managing information across multiple databases, as well as for general purposes of assuring data integrity. However, efficient implementation of constraint checking is difficult. In this paper we explore techniques for assuring constraint satisfaction without performing a complete evaluation of the constraints. We consider methods that use only constraint definitions, methods that use constraints and updates, and methods that use constraints, updates, and “local” data.

References

  1. Blakeley, J. A., N. Coburn, and P.-A. Larson {1989}. "Updating derived relations: detecting irrelevant and autonomously computable updates," A CM Trans. on Database Systems 14:3, pp. 369-400. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Ceri, S. and J. Widom {1990}. "Deriving production rules for constraint maintainence," Proc. International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 566-577. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Ceri, S. and J. Widom {1991}. "Deriving production rules for incremental view maintainance," Proc. International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 577-589. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Chandra, A. K. and H. R. Lewis and J. A. Makowsky {1981}. "Embedded implicational dependencies and their inference problem," Proc. Thirteenth Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pp. 342-354. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Chandra, A. K. and P. M. Merlin {1977}. "Optimal implementation of conjunctive queries in relational databases," Proc. Ninth Annual A CM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pp. 77-90. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Chaudhuri, S. and M. Y. Vardi {1992}. "On the equivalence of datalog programs," Proc. Eleventh ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pp. 55-66. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Courcelle, B. {1991}. "Recursive queries and context-free graph grammars," Theor. CS 78, pp. 217-244. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Elkan, C. {1990}. "Independence of logic database queries and updates," Proc. Ninth A CM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pp. 154-160. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Gupta, A. {1994}. "Efficient Maintenance of Integrity Constraints and Views in Database Systems," Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of CS, Stanford University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Gupta. A. and J. D. Ullman {1992}. "Generalizing conjunctive query containment for view maintenance and integrity constraint verification," Joint Intl. Conf. on Logic Programming, Workshop on Deductive Databases.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Gupta, A. and J. Widom {1993}. "Local verification of global integrity constraints in distributed databases," A CM SIGMOD International Conf. on Management of Data, pp. 49-58. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Klug, A. {1988}. "On conjunctive queries containing inequalities," d. ACM 35:1, pp. 146-160. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Levy, A. Y. and Y. Sagiv {1993}. "Queries independent of update," Proc. International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 171-181. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Nicolas, J.-M. {1982}. "Logic for improving integrity checking in relational databases," Acta Informatica 18:3, pp. 227-253.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Sagiv, Y. {1988}. "Optimizing datalog programs," in Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming (J. Minker, ed.), Morgan-Kaufmann, San Marco. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Sagiv, Y. and M. Yannakakis {1981}. "Equivalence among relational expressions with the union and difference operators," d. ACM 27:4, pp. 633-655. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Shmueli, O. {1987}. "Decidability and expressiveness aspects of logic queries," Proc. Sixth A CM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pp. 237-249. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Tompa, F. W. and J. A. Blakeley {1988}. "Maintaining materialized views without accessing base data," Inform. Systems 13:4, pp. 393-406. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Ullman, J. D. {1989}. Principles of Database and Knowledge-Base Systems, Vol. II: The New Technologies, Computer Science Press, New York. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. van der Meyden, R. {1992}. "The complexity of querying indefinite data about linearly ordered domains," Proc. Eleventh A CM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pp. 331-345. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Constraint checking with partial information

        Recommendations

        Reviews

        Robert J. Tufts

        Constraint checking is one of many techniques used to ensure data integrity in distributed databases. It involves testing a potential update to ensure the resultant changes do not violate data consistency rules. An example might be testing an update to an employee record to make sure the employee is not younger than a minimum age or earning more than a maximum salary. The problem with constraint checking is that each constraint can be as elaborate as a large, compound query. Checking an update against all constraints can slow down the update process to an unacceptable level. Therefore, some effort has been devoted to determining when an update affects a constraint so that constraint checking can be minimized. The purpose of this paper is to explore the full taxonomy of constraints to determine when constraint satisfaction can be assured without performing a complete range of constraint checks. The paper looks at three classes of checks: constraint definitions only; constraints and updates; and constraints, updates, and local data. Of special interest are tests that can be done in the DBMS query language. The authors approach was to divide constraints into six classes of query language expressions that were of interest. Then they considered three different problem sets, each directly related to the three classes of constraint checks mentioned above. Using the six classes, the authors explored what can be done to minimize constraint checking. The results of the authors research were: With constraints alone, the only active solution is subsumption of the constraints by one or more of the other constraints. This can be expressed as conjunctive queries with a test time that is exponential in the size of the query. With constraints and updates, constraints will still be valid if data updates apply to the set of data used for the constraints, provided the constraint refers to all of the legal entries in the database following the update. Constraints with updates and local data can be represented as a complete local test by using a recursive datalog program with arithmetic. Overall, the authors covered the subject well, albeit from more of a theoretical slant than from a practical implementation approach. I would recommend it for general audiences, but it is most useful for those pursuing research in constraint checking with partial information. The bibliography is up to date, with ten of the references to papers published in the 1990s.

        Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

        Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          PODS '94: Proceedings of the thirteenth ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART symposium on Principles of database systems
          May 1994
          313 pages
          ISBN:0897916425
          DOI:10.1145/182591
          • Chairman:
          • Victor Vianu

          Copyright © 1994 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 24 May 1994

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • Article

          Acceptance Rates

          PODS '94 Paper Acceptance Rate28of117submissions,24%Overall Acceptance Rate642of2,707submissions,24%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader