Estimation of false drops in set-valued object retrieval with signature files
Advanced database systems have to support complex data structures as treated in object-oriented data models and nested relational data models. In particular, efficient processing of set-valued object retrieval (simply, set retrieval) is indispensable for such systems. In the previous paper , we proposed the use of signature files as efficient set retrieval facilities and showed their potential capabilities based on a disk page access cost model. Retrieval with signature files is always accompanied by mismatches called false drops, and it is very important in designing signature files to properly control the false drops.
In this paper, we present an in-depth study of false drops in set retrieval with signature files. We derive formulas estimating false drops in four types of set retrieval based on the “has-subset,” “is-subset,” “has-intersection,” and “is-equal” relationships. Then we evaluate their validity by computer simulations. Simulation study is also done to investigate false drops in practically probable more complex situations.
KeywordsQuery Processing Target Signature Element Signature Query Condition Object Retrieval
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.E. Bertino and W. Kim, “Index Techniques for Queries on Nested Objects,” IEEE Trans. Knowledge and Data Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 2, June 1989, pp. 196–214.Google Scholar
- 2.W. W. Chang and H. J. Scheck, “A Signature Access Method for the Starburst Database System,” Proc. 15th VLDB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, August 1989, pp. 145–153.Google Scholar
- 3.C. Faloutsos and S. Christdoulakis, “An Access Method for Documents and Its Analytical Performance Evaluation,” ACM Trans. Office Information Systems, Vol. 2, No. 4, October 1984, pp. 267–288.Google Scholar
- 4.C. Faloutsos and S. Christdoulakis, “Description and Performance Analysis of Signature File Methods for Office Filing,” ACM Trans. Office Information Systems, Vol. 5, No. 3, July 1987, pp. 237–257.Google Scholar
- 5.C. Fischer and S. Thomas, “Operators for Non-First-Normal-Form Relations,” Proc. IEEE COMPSAC 83, Chicago, November 1983, pp. 464–475.Google Scholar
- 6.Y. Ishikawa, H. Kitagawa, and N. Ohbo, “Evaluation of Signature Files as Set Access Facilities in OODBs,” Proc. ACM SIGMOD 1993, Washington, D.C., May 1993, pp.247–256.Google Scholar
- 7.A. Kent, R. Sachs-Davis, and K. Ramamohanarao, “A Superimposed Coding Schema Based on Multiple Block Descriptor Files for Indexing Very Large Data Bases,” Proc. 14th VLDB, Los Angeles, August 1988, pp. 351–359.Google Scholar
- 8.H. Kitagawa and T. L. Kunii, “The Unnormalized Relational Data Model — For Office Form Processor Design,” Springer-Verlag, 1989.Google Scholar
- 9.W. Kim, “Introduction to Object-Oriented Databases,” Computer Systems Series, The MIT Press, 1990.Google Scholar
- 10.R. Sacks-Davis and A. Kent, “Multikey Access Methods Based on Superimposed Coding Techniques,” ACM Trans. Database Systems, Vol12, No. 4, December 1987, pp. 655–698.Google Scholar
- 11.H. Schek and M. Scholl, “The Relational Model with Relation-Valued Attributes,” Information Systems, Vol. 11, No. 2, 1986, pp. 137–147.Google Scholar
- 12.J. Stein and D. Maier “Associative Access Support in GemStone,” in K. R. Dittrich, V. Dayal, and A. P. Buchmann (Eds.), On Object-Oriented Database Systems, Springer-Verlag, 1991, pp. 323–339.Google Scholar
- 13.S. Stiassny, “Mathematical Analysis of Various Superimposed Coding Methods,” American Documentation, Vol. 11, February 1960, pp. 155–169.Google Scholar
- 14.K. F. Wong and M. H. Williams, “A Superimposed Codeword Indexing Schema for Handling Sets in Prolog Databases,” Proc. 2nd International Symposium on Database Systems for Advanced Applications, Tokyo, Japan, April 1991, pp. 468–476.Google Scholar
- 15.S. Zdonik and D. Maier, (Eds.), “Readings in Object-Oriented Database Systems,” Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 1990.Google Scholar