Foundations of canonical update support for closed database views

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 470 LNCS, Issue , 1990, Pages 422-436

  Hegner, Stephen J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COMPUTER SCIENCE; COMPUTERS;

COMPLEXITY RESULTS; DATABASE SCHEMAS; DATABASE VIEWS; FUNCTIONAL DEPENDENCY; MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATIONS; RELATIONAL SCHEMAS; UPDATE SUPPORTS; UPDATE TRANSLATIONS;

DATABASE SYSTEMS;

EID: 78249255948     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-53507-1_93     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (30)

1. Abiteboul, S., “Updates, a new frontier,” in: ICDT’88, 2nd International Conference on Database Theory, pp. 1-18, 1988.
2. Abiteboul, S. and Vianu, V., “A transaction-based approach to relational database specification,” J. Assoc. Comp. Mach., 36(1989), pp. 758-789.
3. Abiteboul, S. and Vianu, V., “Procedural languages for database queries and updates,” 1990, to appear in J. Comput. System Sci.
4. Bancilhon, F. and Spyratos, N., “Independent components of databases,” in: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 398-408, 1981.
5. Bancilhon, F. and Spyratos, N., “Update semantics of relational views,” ACM Trans. Database Systems, 6(1981), pp. 557-575.
6. Beeri, C. and Honeyman, P., “Preserving functional dependencies,” SIAM d. Computing, 10(1981), pp. 647-656.
7. Chandra, A. K. and Merlin, P. M., “Optimal implementation of conjunctive queries in relational databases,” in: Proceedings of the 1976 ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, pp. 77-90, 1976.
8. Cosmadakis, S. and Papadimitriou, C., “Updates of relational views,” J. Assoc. Comp. Mach., 31(1984), pp. 742-760.
9. Dayal, U. and Bernstein, P. A., “On the updatability of relational views,” in: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 368-474, 1978.
10. Dayal, U. and Bernstein, P. A., “On the correct translation of update opeartions on relational views,” ACM Trans. Database Systems, 8(1982), pp. 381-416.
11. Enderton, H, B., A Mathematical Introduction to Logic, Academic Press, 1972.
12. Fagin, R., “Horn clauses and database dependencies,” J. Assoc. Comp. Mach., 29(1982), pp. 952-985.
13. Fagin, R. and Vardi, M. Y., “The theory of data dependencies - a survey,” in: Anshel, M. and Gewirtz, W., eds., Mathematics of Information Processing, pp. 19-71, American Mathematical Society, 1986.
14. Fleischer, I., “A note on subdirect products,” Acta Math. Acad. Set. Hungar., 6(1955), pp. 463-465.
15. Furtado, A. L., Sevcik, K. C., and dos Santos, C. S., “Permitting updates through views of databases,” Information Systems, 4(1979), pp. 269-283.
16. Gallier, J. H., Logic for Computer Science, John Wiley and Sons, 1986.
17. Gottlob, G., Paolini, P., and Zicari, R., “Properties and update semantics of consistent views,” ACM Trans. Database Systems, 13(1988), pp. 486-524.
18. Graham, M. H. and Wang, K., “Constant time maintenance or the triumph of the fd,” in:Proceedings of the Fifth ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pp. 202-216, 1986.
19. Grätzer, G., Universal Algebra, D. Van Nostrand, 1968.
20. Hegner, S. J., “Canonical view update support through Boolean algebras of components,” in: Proceedings of the Third ACM SIGA CT-SIGMOD Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pp. 163-172, 1984.
21. Hegner, S. J., “Unique complements and decompositions of database schemata,” Technical Report PC 12/12.89, Centro di Ricerche in Fisica e Matematica (CERFIM), Locarno, Switzerland, 1989. Submitted for publication. Herrlich, H. and Strecker, G. E., Category Theory, Allyn and Bacon, 1973.
22. Jncobs, B. E., Aronson, A. R., and Klug, A. C., “On interpretations of relational languages and solutions to the implied constraint problem,” ACM Trans. Database Systems, 7(1982), pp. 291-315.
23. Keller, A., “Updates to relational databases through views involving joins,” in: Schueuermann, P., eel., Improving Database Usability and Responsiveness, pp. 363-384, Academic Press, 1982.
24. Keller, A., “Choosing a view update translator by dialog at view definition time,” in:Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 467-474, 1984.
25. Keller, A., “Algorithms for translating view updates to database updates for views involving selections, projections, and joins,” in: Proceedings of the Fourth A CM SIGA CTSIGMOD Conference on Principles of Database Systems, pp. 154-163, 1985.
26. Keller, A., “Comments on Bancilhon and Spyratos’ “Update semantics of relational views”,” ACM Trans. Database Systems, 12(1987), pp. 521-523.
27. Mater, D., The Theory of Relational Databases, Computer Science Press, 1983.
28. Masunaga, Y., “A relational database view update translation mechanism,” in: Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 309-320, 1984.
29. Medeiras, C. B. and Tompa, F. W., “Understanding the implications of view update policies,” in: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 316-323, 1985.
30. Paredaens, J., De Bra, P., Gyssens, M., and Van Gucht, D., The Structure of the Relational Database Model, Springer-Verlag, 1989.