Advertisement

On the gross architecture for the next generation Database Management Systems

  • G. M. Nijssen
Chapter

Abstract

After analyzing the major problems with current information systems, a description is given of how some of these problems may be solved. An essential tool in narrowing the understanding gap between computer specialists on the one side and managers and end-users on the other, is the conceptual schema. The requirements for the concepts in the conceptual schema are discussed and the major candidates for the conceptual schema are briefly evaluated. A gross architecture for the next generation database management systems is presented; essential in this architecture is the conceptual schema, the coextistence of various user mental models and the coexistent use of various manipulation languages as well as the coexistent use of various physical databases on one or more computers. Hence we have given it the name: COEXISTENCE model.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. (1).
    J.R. Abrial, Data semantics, in Data Base Management, Proceedings of the IFIP-V/orking Conference on Data Base Management, held in Cardese, Corsica, April 1–5, 1974, edited by J.W. Klimbie and K.L. Koffeman, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam 1974.Google Scholar
  2. (2).
    M. Adiba, C. Delobel and M.Leonard, A unified approach for modelling data in logical data base design, see reference 31.Google Scholar
  3. (3).
    ANSI, Interim report study group on data base management systems, American National Standards Institute, ANSI/X3/SPARC DBMS Study Group, February 1975.Google Scholar
  4. (4).
    C. W. Bachman and S.B. Williams, A general purpose programming system for random access memories, Proceedings of Fall Joint Computer Conference, October 1964, vol.26 , pp.411–422.Google Scholar
  5. (5).
    E. Benci, F. Bodart, H. Rogaert and A. Canabes, Concepts for the design of a conceptual schema, see reference 31.Google Scholar
  6. (6).
    H. Biller, W. Glatthaar and E.J.Neuhold, On the semantics of data bases: The semantics of data manipulation languages, see references 31.Google Scholar
  7. (7).
    G. Bracchi, A. Fedeli and P.Paolini, A multilevel relational model for data base management systems, in Data Base Management, Proceedings of the IFIP-Working Conference on Data Base Management, held in Cargese, Corsica, April l-5, edited by J. W. Klimbie and K. L. Koffeman, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam 1974.Google Scholar
  8. (8).
    G. Bracchi, P.Paolini and G.Pelagatti, Binary logical assiciations in data modelling, see reference 31.Google Scholar
  9. (9).
    D. D.Chamberlin, Relational data-base management sytsems, ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 8, no.1, March 1976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. (10).
    N. Chomsky, Aspects of a theory of syntax, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1965.Google Scholar
  11. (11).
    Codasyl, Data Base Task Group Report 1969, ACM, New York.Google Scholar
  12. (12).
    Codasyl, Data Base Task Group Report 1971, ACM, New York.Google Scholar
  13. (13).
    Codasyl, DDL journal of development, June 1973, report.Google Scholar
  14. (14).
    Codasyl, Cobol journal of development, published by the Technical Services Branch, Department of Supply and Services, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 1975.Google Scholar
  15. (15).
    E. F. Codd, Recent investigations in relational data base systems, in Information Processing 1974, Proceedings of IFIP Congress, August 5–10, 1974, Sweden, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam 1974.Google Scholar
  16. (16).
    R. Durcholz. Relation representation by tables and by functions, Information Systems, vol. 1, no.3, October 1975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. (17).
    R. Durcholz and G. Richter, Information management concepts (ICM) for use with DBMS interfaces, see references 31.Google Scholar
  18. (18).
    E. Falkenberg, Significations: The key to unify data base management, Information Systems, vol.2, no.1, 1976, pp.19–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. (19).
    E. Falkenberg, Concepts for modelling information, see references 31.Google Scholar
  20. (20).
    Fillmore, The case for case, in Universale in Linguistic Theory, Bach and Harms (eds.), pp.1–90.Google Scholar
  21. (21).
    J. P. Fry and E. H. Sibley, Evolution of data base management systems, ACM Computing Surveys, vol.8, no.1, March 1976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. (22).
    G. Grotenhuis and J. Van den Broek, A conceptual model for information processing, see reference 31.Google Scholar
  23. (23).
    P. Hall, J. Owlett and S. Todd, Relations and entities, see references 31.Google Scholar
  24. (24).
    W. Kent, New criteria for the conceptual model, in Systems for Large Data Bases, edited by P.C. Lockeman and E.J. Neuhold, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam 1976.Google Scholar
  25. (25).
    S.C. Kleene, Introduction to metamathematics, Van Nostrand, Princeton, New Jersey 1952.Google Scholar
  26. (26).
    B. Langefors and B. Sundgren, Information systems architecture, Petrocelli/Charter, New York, 1975.Google Scholar
  27. (27).
    G. Leech, Semantics, Penguin Books, 1974.Google Scholar
  28. (28).
    C. Machgeels, A procedual language for expressing integrity constraints in the coexistence model, see reference 31.Google Scholar
  29. (29).
    A. S. Michaels, B. Mittman and C. R. Carlson, A comparison of the relational and Codasyl approaches to data base management, ACM Computing Surveys, vol.3, no.1, March 1976.Google Scholar
  30. (30).
    P. Moulin, M. Teboul, S. Savoysky, S. Spaccapietra and H. Terdieu, Conceptual model as a data base design tool, see references 31.Google Scholar
  31. (31).
    G. M. Nijssen, (editor), Modelling in data base management systems, Proceedings of the IFIP Working Conference on Modelling in Data Base Management Systems, held in Freudenstadt, Germany, January 5–8, 1976, North-Holland Publihsing Company, Amsterdam, 1976.Google Scholar
  32. (32).
    G. M. Nijssen, Set and Codasyl set or coset, in Data Base Management Description, Proceedings of the IFIP Special Working Conference on Data Rase Description Languages, an in-depth technical evaluation of the CODASYL DDL, held in Wepion, Belgium, January 13–17, 1975, edited by B.C.M. Douque and G.M.Nijssen, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam 197 5.Google Scholar
  33. (33).
    G.M. Nijssen, Two major flown in the Codasyl DDL 1973 and proposed corrections, in Information Systems, vol. 1, Pergamon Press, 1975, pp.115–132.Google Scholar
  34. (34).
    G.M. Nijssen, A gross architecture for the next generation database management systems, see reference 31.Google Scholar
  35. (35).
    T.W. Olle, Current and future trends in data base management systems, in Information Processing 74, Proceedings of IFIP Congress, August 5-l0, 1974, Sweden, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam 1974.Google Scholar
  36. (36).
    J. Ruchti, Data descriptions embedded in context, see reference 31.Google Scholar
  37. (37).
    M.E. Senko, DIAM as a detailes example of the ANSI SPARC architecture, see references 31.Google Scholar
  38. (38).
    E.H. Sibley, The development of data base technology, ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 8, no. 1, March 1976.Google Scholar
  39. (39).
    T.B. Steel Jr., Data base standardization: A status report, in Data Base Description, Proceedings of the IFIP Special Working Conferences on Data Description Languages, an in-depth technical evaluation of the CODASYL DDL, held in Wepion, Belgium, January 13–17, 1975, edited by B.C.M. Douque and G. M. Nijssen, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam 1975.Google Scholar
  40. (40).
    T.B. Steel Jr., Discussion at the IFIP WG 2.6 (Databases) meeting, September 1976.Google Scholar
  41. (41).
    B. Sundgren, Theory of data bases, Petrocelli/Charter, New York, l975.Google Scholar
  42. (42).
    R.W. Taylor and R.L. Frank, CODASYL data base management systems, ACM Computing Surveys, vol.8, no.1, March 1976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. (43).
    D.C. Tsichritzis and F.H. Lochovsky, Hierarchical data base management, ACM Computing Surveys, vol.8, no.1, March 1376.Google Scholar
  44. (44).
    L. Vandijk, Towards a more familiar relational retrieval language, accepted for publication in Information Systems.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. M. Nijssen

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations