skip to main content
10.1145/1065167.1065178acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespodsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

On the complexity of division and set joins in the relational algebra

Published:13 June 2005Publication History

ABSTRACT

We show that any expression of the relational division operator in the relational algebra with union, difference, projection, selection, and equijoins, must produce intermediate results of quadratic size. To prove this result, we show a dichotomy theorem about intermediate sizes of relational algebra expressions (they are either all linear, or at least one is quadratic); we link linear relational algebra expressions to expressions using only semijoins instead of joins; and we link these semijoin algebra expressions to the guarded fragment of first-order logic.

References

  1. S. Abiteboul, R. Hull, and V. Vianu. Foundations of Databases. Addison-Wesley, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. A. Aho, J. E. Hopcroft, and J. D. Ullman. Data Structures and Algorithms. Addison-Wesley, 1983. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. H. Andréka, I. Németi, and J. van Benthem. Modal languages and bounded fragments of predicate logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 27(3):217--274, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. C. Beeri, R. Fagin, D. Maier, and M. Yannakakis. On the desirability of acyclic database schemes. Journal of the ACM, 30(3):479--513, 1983. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. P. A. Bernstein and D. W. Chiu. Using semi-joins to solve relational queries. Journal of the ACM, 28(1):25--40, 1981. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. P. A. Bernstein and N. Goodman. Power of natural semijoins. SIAM Journal on Computing, 10(4):751--771, 1981.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. E. F. Codd. Relational completeness of data base sublanguages. In R. Rustin, editor, Data Base Systems, pages 65--98. Prentice-Hall, 1972.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. H. de Nivelle and M. de Rijke. Deciding the guarded fragments by resolution. Journal of Symbolic Computation, 35(1):21--58, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. J. Flum, M. Frick, and M. Grohe. Query evaluation via tree-decompositions. Journal of the ACM, 49(6):716--752, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. G. Gottlob, E. Grädel, and H. Veith. Datalog lite: a deductive query language with linear time model checking. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic, 3(1):42--79, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. E. Grädel. On the restraining power of guards. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 64(4):1719--1742, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. E. Grädel, C. Hirsch, and M. Otto. Back and forth between guarded and modal logics. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic, 3(3):418--463, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. G. Graefe. Relational division: four algorithms and their performance. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Data Engineering, pages 94--101. IEEE Computer Society, 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. G. Graefe and R. L. Cole. Fast algorithms for universal quantification in large databases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 20(2):187--236, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. S. Helmer and G. Moerkotte. Evaluation of main memory join algorithms for joins with set comparison join predicates. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pages 386--395. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. D. Leinders, J. Tyszkiewicz, and J. Van den Bussche. On the expressive power of semijoin queries. Information Processing Letters, 91(2):93--98, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. N. Mamoulis. Efficient processing of joins on set-valued attributes. In Proceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pages 157--168. ACM Press, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. K. Ramasamy, J. M. Patel, J. F. Naughton, and R. Kaushik. Set containment joins: The good, the bad and the ugly. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pages 351--362. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. S. G. Rao, A. Badia, and D. Van Gucht. Providing better support for a class of decision support queries. In Proceedings of the 1996 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pages 217--227. ACM Press, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. S. Sarawagi and A. Kirpal. Efficient set joins on similarity predicates. In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pages 743--754. ACM Press, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

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 '05: Proceedings of the twenty-fourth ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART symposium on Principles of database systems
    June 2005
    388 pages
    ISBN:1595930620
    DOI:10.1145/1065167
    • General Chair:
    • Georg Gottlob,
    • Program Chair:
    • Foto Afrati

    Copyright © 2005 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: 13 June 2005

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • Article

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate642of2,707submissions,24%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader