Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Towards a Dynamic Inconsistency-Tolerant Schema Maintenance

  • Conference paper
Advances in Conceptual Modeling – Challenges and Opportunities (ER 2008)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 5232))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1357 Accesses

Abstract

When a relational database schema changes, the questions arises if any integrity constraint is violated by the change. For dynamic schema maintenance, traditional methods to answer this question have several debilities. First, they require that all integrity constraints be satisfied before admitting any update, although extant integrity violations are frequent in practice. Second, they are inefficient for dynamic changes of integrity constraints. Third, they are unflexible wrt safety-critical constraints. Fourth, they usually do not care at all whether an updated schema remains satisfiable. We propose improvements of each of these weaknesses.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rodríguez, A.: Inconsistency Issues in Spatial Databases. In: Inconsistency Tolerance. LNCS, vol. 3300, pp. 237–269. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bry, F., Decker, H., Manthey, R.: A uniform approach to constraint satisfaction and constraint satisfiability in deductive databases. In: Schmidt, J.W., Missikoff, M., Ceri, S. (eds.) EDBT 1988. LNCS, vol. 303, pp. 488–505. Springer, Heidelberg (1988)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Cabot, J., Conesa, J.: Automatic Integrity Constraint Evolution due to Model Subtract Operations. In: Wang, S., Tanaka, K., Zhou, S., Ling, T.-W., Guan, J., Yang, D.-q., Grandi, F., Mangina, E.E., Song, I.-Y., Mayr, H.C. (eds.) ER Workshops 2004. LNCS, vol. 3289, pp. 350–362. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Christiansen, H., Martinenghi, D.: On simplification of database integrity constraints. Fundam. Inform. 71(4), 371–417 (2006)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Decker, H., Martinenghi, D.: A relaxed approach to integrity and inconsistency in databases. In: Hermann, M., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4246, pp. 287–301. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Decker, H., Martinenghi, D.: Classifying Integrity Checking Methods with regard to Inconsistency Tolerance. In: 10th PPDP. ACM Press, New York (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gupta, A., Sagiv, Y., Ullman, J., Widom, J.: Constraint checking with partial information. In: 13th PODS, pp. 45–55. ACM Press, New York (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Lee, S.Y., Ling, T.W.: Further improvements on integrity constraint checking for stratifiable deductive databases. In: 22nd VLDB, pp. 495–505. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lloyd, J., Sonenberg, L., Topor, R.: Integrity constraint checking in stratified databases. J. Log. Progr. 4(4), 331–343 (1987)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Martinenghi, D., Christiansen, H., Decker, H.: Integrity checking and maintenance in relational and deductive databases and beyond. In: Ma, Z. (ed.) Intelligent Databases: Technologies and Applications, pp. 238–285. Idea Group (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Nicolas, J.M.: Logic for improving integrity checking in relational data bases. Acta Informatica 18, 227–253 (1982)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Rahm, E., Bernstein, P.: An online bibliography on schema evolution. SIGMOD Record 35(4), 30–31 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ramakrishnan, R., Gehrke, J.: Database Management Systems. McGraw-Hill, New York (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sadri, F., Kowalski, R.: A theorem-proving approach to database integrity. In: Minker, J. (ed.) Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, pp. 313–362. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1988)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Türker, C.: Schema Evolution in SQL-99 and Commercial (Object-)Relational DBMS. In: Balsters, H., De Brock, B., Conrad, S. (eds.) FoMLaDO 2000. LNCS, vol. 2065, pp. 1–32. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wijsen, J.: Inconsistency and Incompleteness in Databases. In: Grust, T., Höpfner, H., Illarramendi, A., Jablonski, S., Mesiti, M., Müller, S., Patranjan, P.-L., Sattler, K.-U., Spiliopoulou, M., Wijsen, J. (eds.) EDBT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4254, pp. 278–374. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Instituto Tecnológico de Informática, Valencia, Spain

    Hendrik Decker

Authors
  1. Hendrik Decker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of Information Science and Technology, Drexel University, USA

    Il-Yeol Song

  2. Dep. of Information Technologies & Systems - Escuela Superior de Informática, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Alarcos Research Group- Institute of Information Technologies & Systems, Ciudad Real, Spain

    Mario Piattini

  3. School of Engineering and Information Technology, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Vic, 3125, Australia

    Yi-Ping Phoebe Chen

  4. Clausthal University of Technology, Julius-Albert-Str. 4, 38678, Clausthal-Zellerfeld, Germany

    Sven Hartmann

  5. Dipartimento di Elettronica, Informatica e Sistemistica, Alma Mater Studiorum – Università di Bologna, P.O. Box, Italy

    Fabio Grandi

  6. Department of Software and Computing Systems, University of Alicante, Spain

    Juan Trujillo

  7. Department of Information Science and Media Studies, University of Bergen, Fosswinckelsgate 6, 5007, Bergen, Norway

    Andreas L. Opdahl

  8. Istituto di Ricerche sulla Popolazione e Politiche Sociali, CNR, Via Nizza 128, 00198, Roma, Italy

    Fernando Ferri  & Patrizia Grifoni  & 

  9. IRPPS-CNR, Rome, Italy

    Maria Chiara Caschera

  10. Universit Paris1 Panthon Sorbonne, CRI, 90 Rue de Tolbiac, 75013, Paris

    Colette Rolland

  11. Portland State University, USA; Indiana University, USA University of British Columbia, Canada; Hill-Rom Company, USA University of British Columbia, Canada; Deloitte Consulting, P.O. Box, USA

    Carson Woo

  12. Centre de Recherche en Informatique, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, 90 rue de Tolbiac, 75013, Paris

    Camille Salinesi

  13. Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium

    Esteban Zimányi

  14. Naval Academy Research Institute, Brest Naval, France

    Christophe Claramunt

  15. Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, PO Box 513, NL-5600 MB, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

    Flavius Frasincar

  16. Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, P.O. Box 513, NL 5600 MB, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

    Geert-Jan Houben

  17. IMRU-FUNDP, University of Namur, Namur, Belgium

    Philippe Thiran

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Decker, H. (2008). Towards a Dynamic Inconsistency-Tolerant Schema Maintenance. In: Song, IY., et al. Advances in Conceptual Modeling – Challenges and Opportunities. ER 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5232. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87991-6_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87991-6_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-87990-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-87991-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics