Skip to main content

Simple SQL Validation of Generalized Entity Integrity

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
  • 520 Accesses

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 11393))

Abstract

Codd’s rule of entity integrity stipulates the existence of a primary key over every database table. That is, uniqueness and absence of null markers are enforced on the columns of the primary key. Key sets stipulate a generalized entity integrity rule that can be achieved on data sets where primary keys do not exist. Indeed, a key set means that different pairs of rows can be distinguished by unique non-null values on potentially different elements of the key set. While primary keys are a core feature of SQL databases, key sets have not been researched much at all. Our goal is to motivate the actual use of key sets in database systems. The use of key sets depends at least on the ability to identify those key sets that are meaningful in a given application domain, and to efficiently validate such key sets during the lifetime of the database. For this purpose, we analyze for the first time the performance of validating key sets in SQL experimentally, and also conduct experiments that provide insight on the time and size required to generate Armstrong relations for the implication of unary key sets by arbitrary key sets. Armstrong relations provide computational support for identifying key sets that are meaningful for a given application domain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://hpi.de/naumann/projects/repeatability/data-profiling/fds.html.

References

  1. Bläsius, T., Friedrich, T., Schirneck, M.: The parameterized complexity of dependency detection in relational databases. In: Guo, J., Hermelin, D. (eds.) 11th International Symposium on Parameterized and Exact Computation, IPEC 2016, August 24-26, 2016, Aarhus, Denmark. LIPIcs, vol. 63, pp. 6:1–6:13. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brown, P., Link, S.: Probabilistic keys. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 29(3), 670–682 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Eiter, T., Gottlob, G., Makino, K.: New results on monotone dualization and generating hypergraph transversals. SIAM J. Comput. 32(2), 514–537 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Fan, W., Fan, Z., Tian, C., Dong, X.L.: Keys for graphs. PVLDB 8(12), 1590–1601 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hannula, M., Link, S.: Automated reasoning about key sets. In: Galmiche, D., Schulz, S., Sebastiani, R. (eds.) IJCAR 2018. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10900, pp. 47–63. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94205-6_4

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Hartmann, S., Leck, U., Link, S.: On Codd families of keys over incomplete relations. Comput. J. 54(7), 1166–1180 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hartmann, S., Link, S.: Efficient reasoning about a robust XML key fragment. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 34(2), 10 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Koehler, H., Leck, U., Link, S., Prade, H.: Logical foundations of possibilistic keys. In: Fermé, E., Leite, J. (eds.) JELIA 2014. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8761, pp. 181–195. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11558-0_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Köhler, H., Leck, U., Link, S., Zhou, X.: Possible and certain keys for SQL. VLDB J. 25(4), 571–596 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Langeveldt, W., Link, S.: Empirical evidence for the usefulness of Armstrong relations in the acquisition of meaningful functional dependencies. Inf. Syst. 35(3), 352–374 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Levene, M., Loizou, G.: A generalisation of entity and referential integrity in relational databases. ITA 35(2), 113–127 (2001)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Lucchesi, C.L., Osborn, S.L.: Candidate keys for relations. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 17(2), 270–279 (1978)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Thalheim, B.: Dependencies in Relational Databases. Teubner, Stuttgart (1991)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. Thalheim, B.: On semantic issues connected with keys in relational databases permitting null values. Elektronische Informationsverarbeitung und Kybernetik 25(1/2), 11–20 (1989)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Wei, Z., Link, S., Liu, J.: Contextual keys. In: Mayr, H.C., Guizzardi, G., Ma, H., Pastor, O. (eds.) ER 2017. LNCS, vol. 10650, pp. 266–279. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69904-2_22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hong Zhang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Zhang, Z., Zhang, H., Link, S. (2019). Simple SQL Validation of Generalized Entity Integrity. In: Chang, L., Gan, J., Cao, X. (eds) Databases Theory and Applications. ADC 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11393. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12079-5_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12079-5_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-12078-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-12079-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics