Search

Abstract: As a result of the extensive research in view-based query processing, three notions have been identified as fundamental, namely rewriting, answering, and losslessness. Answering amounts to computing the tuples satisfying the query in all databases consistent with the views. Rewriting consists in first reformulating the query in terms of the views and then evaluating the rewriting over the view extensions. Losslessness holds if we can answer the query by solely relying on the content of the views. While the mutual relationship between these three notions is easy to identify in the case of conjunctive queries, the terrain of notions gets considerably more complicated going beyond such a query class. In this paper, we revisit the notions of answering, rewriting, and losslessness and clarify their relationship in the setting of semistructured databases, and in particular for the basic query class in this setting, i.e., two-way regular path queries. Our first result is a clean explanation of the relationship between answering and rewriting, in which we characterize rewriting as a “linear approximation” of query answering. We show that applying this linear approximation to the constraint-satisfaction framework yields an elegant automata-theoretic approach to query rewriting. As for losslessness, we show that there are indeed two distinct interpretations for this notion, namely with respect to answering, and with respect to rewriting. We also show that the constraint-theoretic approach and the automata-theoretic approach can be combined to give algorithmic characterization of the various facets of losslessness. Finally, we deal with the problem of coping with loss, by considering mechanisms aimed at explaining lossiness to the user. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The most natural and perhaps most frequently used method for testing membership of an individual tuple in a conjunctive query is based on searching trees of partial solutions, or search-trees. We investigate the question of evaluating conjunctive queries with a time-bound guarantee that is measured as a function of the size of the optimal search-tree. We provide an algorithm that, given a database , a conjunctive query , and a tuple , tests whether holds in in time bounded by a polynomial in and , where is the size of the domain of the database, is the number of bound variables of the conjunctive query, is the size of the optimal search-tree, and is the maximum arity of the relations. In many cases of interest, this bound is significantly smaller than the bound provided by the naive search-tree method. Moreover, our algorithm has the advantage of guaranteeing the bound for any given conjunctive query. In particular, it guarantees the bound for queries that admit an equivalent form that is much easier to evaluate, even when finding such a form is an NP-hard task. Concrete examples include the conjunctive queries that can be non-trivially folded into a conjunctive query of bounded size or bounded treewidth. All our results translate to the context of constraint-satisfaction problems via the well-publicized correspondence between both frameworks. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: We consider the problem of answering queries using views, where queries and views are conjunctive queries with arithmetic comparisons over dense orders. Previous work only considered limited variants of this problem, without giving a complete solution. We first show that obtaining equivalent rewritings for conjunctive queries with arithmetic comparisons is decidable. Then, we consider the problem of finding maximally contained rewritings (MCRs) where the decidability proof does not carry over. We investigate two special cases of this problem where the query uses only semi-interval comparisons. In both cases decidability of finding MCRs depends on the query containment test. First, we address the case where the homomorphism property holds in testing query containment. In this case decidability is easy to prove but developing an efficient algorithm is not trivial. We develop such an algorithm and prove that it is sound and complete. This algorithm applies in many cases where the query uses only left (or right) semi-interval comparisons. Then, we develop a new query containment test for the case where the containing query uses both left and right semi-interval comparisons but with only one left (or right) semi-interval subgoal. Based on this test, we show how to produce an MCR which is a Datalog query with arithmetic comparisons. The containment test that we develop obtains a result of independent interest. It finds another special case where query containment in the presence of arithmetic comparisons can be tested in nondeterministic polynomial time. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Active database systems enhance the functionality of traditional databases through the use of active rules or ‘triggers’. One of the principal analysis questions for such systems is that of termination—is it possible for the rules to recursively activate one another indefinitely, given an initial triggering event. In this paper, we study the decidability of the termination problem, our aim being to delimit the boundary between the decidable and the undecidable. We present results for two broad types of variations, variations in rule syntax and variations in meta level features. Within each of these, we identify members close to the boundary of (un)decidability and also look at the effect of combining members of each type. The maximal decidable class we present is capable of expressing some useful kinds of application requirements, such as checking and repairing inclusion constraints. The work is also interesting from a theoretical point of view, since the context is similar to the while query language and the dynamics gives an interesting contrast to Datalog with negation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

It is a folk result in database theory that SQL cannot express recursive queries such as reachability; in fact, a new construct was added to SQL3 to overcome this limitation. However, the evidence for this claim is usually given in the form of a reference to a proof that relational algebra cannot express such queries. SQL, on the other hand, in all its implementations has three features that fundamentally distinguish it from relational algebra: namely, grouping, arithmetic operations, and aggregation.In the past few years, most questions about the additional power provided by these features have been answered. This paper surveys those results, and presents new simple and self-contained proofs of the main results on the expressive power of SQL. Somewhat surprisingly, tiny differences in the language definition affect the results in a dramatic way: under some very natural assumptions, it can be proved that SQL cannot define recursive queries, no matter what aggregate functions and arithmetic operations are allowed. But relaxing these assumptions just a tiny bit makes the problem of proving expressivity bounds for SQL as hard as some long-standing open problems in complexity theory. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]