A notation for describing aggregate relationships in an object-oriented data model
The emphasis in object-oriented databases (OODBs) is on the inheritance, or “is a,” type of relationship; yet, many relationships within databases are of the aggregate type—e.g., “is a part of” and “is associated with.” While the semantics of the inheritance relationship is directly supported by OODB systems, the semantics of aggregate relationships must often be implemented again and again by application programmers.
To address this problem, this paper proposes a notation for describing the semantics of a taxonomy of aggregate relationship types. The notation can be incorporated into an Object-Relationship Diagram (ORD) and an Object-oriented Database Definition Language (ODDL) to provide enhanced conceptual models for OODB design and improved support of aggregate relationships by an extended OODB system. Such support can significantly ease database applications development and improve the integrity of database operation.
KeywordsClass Object Relationship Type Relative Class Relationship Semantic Subject Class
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.A. Albano, G. Ghelli, and B. Orsini, “A Relationship Mechanism for a Strongly Typed Object-Oriented Database Programming Language,” Proc. of the 17th Int'l VLDB Conf., Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1991, 565–575.Google Scholar
- 2.E. Bertino and L. Martino, “Object-Oriented Database Management Systems: Concepts and Issues,” Computer, IEEE Computer Society Press, 24(4), April 1991, 33–47.Google Scholar
- 4.R.G.G. Cattel, ed., T. Atwood, J. Duhl, G. Ferran, M. Loomis, D. Wade, The Object Database Standard: ODMG-93, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1994.Google Scholar
- 7.C.J. Date, “Referential Integrity,” Proc. 7th Int'l VLDB Conf., IEEE Computer Society Press, 1981, 2–12.Google Scholar
- 8.C.J. Date, An Introduction to Database Systems Volume II, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1983, 241–289.Google Scholar
- 9.B.K. Ehlmann, L.C. Dennis, and G.A. Riccardi, “An Object-based Conceptual Model of a Nuclear Physics Experiments Database,” Nuclear Instruments & Methods in Physics Research, Sect. A, Elsevier Science, North-Holland, A325, 1993, 294–308.Google Scholar
- 10.B.K. Ehlmann, “Applying an Object-Oriented Database Model to a Scientific Database Problem: Managing Experimental Data at CEBAF,” Ph.D. dissertation, Florida State Univ., Tallahassee, FL, UMI Dissertation Services, Ann Arbor, MI, 1992.Google Scholar
- 11.D.W. Embley and T.W. Ling, “Synergistic Database Design with an Extended Entity-Relationship Model,” Entity-Relationship Approach to Database Design and Query, F.H. Lochovsky, ed., North Holland, New York, NY, 1990, 111–128.Google Scholar
- 12.D.H. Fishman, et al., “Overview of the IRIS DBMS,” Object-Oriented Concepts, Applications, and Databases, W. Kim and F. Lochovsky, eds., Addison-Wesley (ACM Press), Reading, MA, 1989, 219–250.Google Scholar
- 17.V.M. Markowitz, “Referential Integrity Revisited: An Object-oriented Perspective,” Proc. 16th Int'l VLDB Conf., Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1990, 578–589.Google Scholar
- 18.Object Design Inc., ObjectStore Technical Overview, Burlington, MA, May, 1991.Google Scholar
- 19.Objectivity Inc., Objectivity/DB System Overview, Menlo Park, CA. March, 1990.Google Scholar
- 20.Ontologic Inc., ONTOS Release 2.0 Product Description, Burlington, MA, Oct. 1990.Google Scholar
- 21.G.A. Riccardi and B.K. Ehlmann, “Object-oriented Development of Scientific Databases, an Example from Experimental Physics,” Proc. of the First Software Eng. Research Forum, Tampa, FL, Nov. 1991, 277–286.Google Scholar
- 24.H.A. Schmid and J.R. Swenson, “On the Semantics of the Relational Data Model,” Proc. ACM SIGMOD Int'l Conf. on Management of Data, 1975Google Scholar
- 26.J. P. Thompson, Data With Semantics, Van Nostrand Reinhold, NY, 1989, 237–253.Google Scholar
- 28.S.B. Zdonik and D. Maier, eds. “Fundamentals of Object-Oriented Databases,” Readings in Object-Oriented DB Systems, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1990, 1–32.Google Scholar