Self-Describing and Self-Documenting Database Systems

  • Nick Roussopoulos
  • Leo Mark
Part of the Management and Information Systems book series (MIS)

Abstract

The ANSI/SPARC DBSSG(1) took a major step forward for the database community when it identified the need for a conceptual schema in the context of a three-schema framework for database systems. The three-schema framework allows a clear separation of the conceptual schema from the external schema and the internal physical schema, resulting in databases which are flexible and adaptable to changes. A new step forward needs to be taken if the database system framework is to allow databases to be flexible and adaptable to changes of the conceptual schema.

Keywords

Data Model Database System Data Object Conceptual Schema Application Data 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    D. TsichritzIs, and A. Klug (Eds.), The Ansi/X3/Sparc Dbms framework, Inf. Syst. 3(3), 173–191, (1978).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. D. Chamberlin et al.,Sequel 2: A unified approach to data definition, manipulation, and control, IBMJ. Res. Dev. 20(6), 560–575.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    E. F. Codd, Extending the database relational model to capture more meaning, ACM TODS 4 (4), 397–434, (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. J. Van Griethuysen (Ed.), Iso TC97/SC5/WG3: Concepts and terminology for the conceptual schema and information base, Ansi, 1982.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    P. Hall, J. OwLett, and S. Todd, Relations and entities, in G. M. Nijssen (Ed.) Modeling in Data Base Management Systems, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1976.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. Hofstadter, Gödel, Escher & Bach, Basic Books, New York, 1979.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. Jefferson, Reference model priorities and definition, Note for Iso/TC97/SC5/ WG5, No. 106, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C., 1983.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    W. Kent, Data and Reality, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    L. Mark and A. Leick, Ideas for new conceptual schema languages, in H. Kanagassalo (Ed.), First Scandinavian Research Seminar on Information Modeling and Data Base Management, University of Tampere, Finland, 1982, Series B, Vol. 17.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    L. Mark, What is the binary relationship approach?, in C. G. Davis (Ed.), Entity-Relationship Approach to Software Engineering, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1983.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    L. Mark and N. Roussopoulos, Integration of data, schema and meta-schema in the context of self-documenting data models, in C. G. Davis (Ed.), Entity-Relationship Approach to Software Engineering, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1983.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    L. Mark and N. Roussopoulos, Fall and rise of an Ansi/Sparc Dbms framework, Working Note for the Ansi/Sparc/X3 Database Architecture Framework Task Group, 1984.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    L. Mark Self-describing database systems-formalization and realization,Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, April, 1985.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    L. Mark and N. Roussopoulos, The reference model, Working Note for the Ansi/ Sparc/X3 Database Architecture Framework Task Group, 1984.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    National Bureau of Standards, An architecture for database management standards, Prepared by Computer Corporation of America, Report No. Nbs 500–86, 1982.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    G. M. Nijssen, An architecture for knowledge base software, presented to the Australian Computer Society, Melbourne, July 30, 1981.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    N. RoussopouLos, View indexing in relational database, ACM Trans. Database Syst. 7 (2), 258–290 (1982).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    N. RoussopouLos, The logical access path schema of a database, IEEE Trans. Software Eng. SE-8(6), 563–573 (1982).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    N. RoussopouLos, A self-documenting relational model, TR-1264, Computer Science Department, University of Maryland, College Park, April, 1983.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    N. Roussopou Los and L. Mark, A self-describing meta-schema for the RM/T data model, In IEEE Workshop on Languages for Automation, IEEE Computer Society Press, New York, 1983.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    N. Roussopout.os, C. Bader, and J. O’Conner, Adms—A self-describing and self-documenting relational database system, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, August, 1984.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    N. RoussopouLos and L. Mark, A framework for self-describing and self-documenting database systems, Nbs Trends and Application Conference, 1984.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    D. Smith and J. Smith, Database abstractions: Aggregation and generalization, ACM TODS 2 (2), 105–133, (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    W. Truszkowski, Private communication, 1984.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    M. M. Zloof, Query by Example: The innovation and definition of tables and forms, Proceedings on Very Large Database Conference, 1975.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nick Roussopoulos
    • 1
  • Leo Mark
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations