Algebraic Database Migration to Object Technology

  • Andreas Behm
  • Andreas Geppert
  • Klaus R. Dittrich
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1920)


Relational database systems represent the current standard technology for implementing database applications. Now that the object-oriented paradigm becomes more and more mature in all phases of the software engineering process, object-oriented DBMS are seriously considered for the seamless integration of object-oriented applications and data persistence. However, when reengineering existing applications or constructing new ones on top of relational databases, a large semantic gap between the new object model and the legacy database’s model must be bridged. We propose database migration to resolve this mismatch: the relational schema is transformed into an object-oriented one and the relational data is migrated to an object-oriented database. Existing approaches for migration do not exploit the full potential of the object-oriented paradigm so that the resulting object-oriented schema still “looks rather relational” and retains the drawbacks and weaknesses of the relational schema. We propose a redesign environment which allows to transform relational schemas into adequate object-oriented ones. Schemas and transformation rules are expressed in terms of a new data model, called semi object types (SOT). We also propose a formal foundation for SOT and transformation rules. This formalization makes it possible to automatically generate the data migration process.


Transformation Rule Migration Process Relational Schema Object Technology Schema Transformation 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    S. Amer-Yahia, S. Cluet, and C. Delobel. Bulk loading techniques for object databases and an application to relational data. Proc. Int’l Conf. on Very Large Databases (VLDB), New York, August 1998.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    C. Batini, S. Ceri, and S. Navathe. Conceptual database design: an entity-relationship approach. Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, Inc., 1992.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    C. Beeri. Query languages for models with object-oriented features. In Advances in Object-Oriented Database Systems, NATO ASI Series, chapter 3. Springer-Verlag, 1994.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    C. Beeri and Y. Kornatzky. Algebraic optimization of object-oriented query languages. Proc. 3rd Int’l Conf. on Database Theory, Paris, France, December 1990.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    A. Behm. Migrating relational databases to object technology. PhD thesis (forthcoming), University of Zurich, Switzerland, 2000.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    A. Behm, A. Geppert, and K. R. Dittrich. On the migration of relational schemas and data to object-oriented database systems. Proc. 5th Int’l Conf. on Re-Technologies for Information Systems, Klagenfurt, Austria, December 1997.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    M. Blaha and W. Premerlani. A catalog of object model transformations. Proc. 3rd Working Conf. on Reverse Engineering, Monterey, California, November 1996.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    M. Blaha and W. Premerlani. Detailed design. In Object-Oriented Modeling and Design for Database Applications, chapter 10. Prentice-Hall, 1998.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    G. Booch. Object-Oriented Analysis and Design with Applications. Benjamin/Cummings, 1994.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    R. G. G. Cattell. The object data standard: ODMG 3.0. Morgan Kaufmann, 2000.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    S. Cluet and C. Delobel. A general framework for the optimization of object-oriented queries. Proc. SIGMOD Int’l Conf. on Management of Data, New York, June 1992.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    S. Cluet and G. Moerkotte. Classification and optimization of nested queries in object bases. In Bases de Donnees Avancees, 1994.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    J. Fong. Converting relational to object-oriented databases. SIGMOD Record, 26(1), 1997.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    A. Geppert, K. R. Dittrich, V. Goebel, and S. Scherrer. The NO2 data model. Technical Report 93.09, Institut fuer Informatik der Universität Zürich, 1993.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    J-L. Hainaut, C. Tonneau, M. Joris, and M. Chandelon. Transformation-based Database Reverse Engineering. Proc. 12th Int. Conf. on the ER Approach, Dallas, December 1993.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    R. J. Miller, Y. E. Ioannidis, and R. Ramakrishnan. The use of information capacity in schema integration and translation. Proc. 19th VLDB Conf., Dublin, Ireland, 1993.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    G. Mitchell, S.B. Zdonik, and U. Dayal. Optimizations of object-oriented query languages: Problems and approaches. In Advances in Object-Oriented Database Systems, NATO ASI Series, chapter 6, Springer-Verlag, 1994.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    G. M. Shaw and S. B. Zdonik. A query algebra for object-oriented databases. Proc. Int’l Conf. on Data Engineering, Los Angeles, CA, February 1990.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    S. L. Vandenberg and D. J. DeWitt. Algebraic support for complex objects with arrays, identity, and inheritance. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD, May 1991Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andreas Behm
    • 1
  • Andreas Geppert
    • 1
  • Klaus R. Dittrich
    • 1
  1. 1.Database Technology Research Group Department of Information TechnologyUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations