Advertisement

Decompositions of Relations: A Comprehensive Approach

  • J. Paredaens
  • D. Janssens

Abstract

In this paper a new integrity constraint, called general dependencies, is introduced. It generalizes a number of well-known types of constraints. A corresponding decomposition property is given and a set of inference rules is presented.

A characterization of trivial general dependencies and of unique disjoint general dependencies (a restricted type of general dependencies) is also included. The proofs of these characterizations show that the given set of inference rules is complete for these classes of dependencies.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Armstrong, W. W. [1974] “Dependency Structures of Data Base Relationships”, Proc. IFIP 74, North Holland, 1974, 580–583.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bernstein, P. A. [1976] “Synthesizing Third Normal Form Relations from Functional Dependencies,” ACM TODS 1, 4 (Dec. 1976), 277–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beeri, C., Fagin, R., and Howard, J. H. [1977] “A Complete Axiomatization for Functional and Multivalued Dependencies in Relational Data BAses”, Proc. ACM SIGMOD 3rd Conf. on Management of Data, Toronto, Canada, August 1977, 47–61.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Codd, E.F. [1970] “A Relational Model for Large Shared Data Bases,” CACM 13, 6 (June 1970), 377–387.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Codd, E. F. [1971] “Further Normalization of the Data Base Relational Model”, In: Data Base Systems, Courant Com. Sc. Symp. Series 6 (R. Rusin, Ed.), Prentice-Hall, 1971, 33–64.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dayal, U., Bernstein, P. [1978] “The Fragmentation Problem: Lossless Decomposition of Relations into Files”, TR. CCA-78–13, Computer Corporation of America, Cambridge, Mass., 1978.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Delobel, C. [1978] “Normalization and Hierarchical Dependencies in the Relational Data Model”, ACM TODS 3, 3 (Sept. 1978), 201–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Delobel, C. and Pichat, E. [1978] “Application de l’algèbre aux modèles de données relationnels”, Congres AFCET-SMF, 1978.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fagin, R. [1977] “Multivalued Dependencies and a New Normal Form for Relational Databases”, ACM TODS 2, 3 (Sept. 1977) 262–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fagin, R. [1979] “Normal Forms and Relational Database Operators,” ACM SIGMOD, Boston, May 30-June 1, 1979, 153–160.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maier, D. and Mendelzon, A. [1979] “Generalized Mutual Dependencies and the Decomposition of Database Relations,” Proc. 5th Intl. Conf. on VLDB, Rio de Janeiro, Oct. 1979, 75–82.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nicolas, J. M. [1978] “Mutual Dependencies and Some Results on Undecomposable Relations”, Proceedings of VLDB, 1978.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Paredaens, J. [1980] “The Interaction of Integrity Constraints in an Information System”, to appear in JCSS, 1980.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Paredaens, J. [1979] “Transitive Dependencies in a Database Scheme,” MBLE, R387, 1979, to appear in RAIRO Informatique/Computer Science 14, 2, (1980).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rissanen, J. [1978] “Theory of Relations for Databases — A Tutorial Survey”, Proc. 7th Symp. on Math. Found. of Comp. Sci., Lecture Notes in Comp. Science 64, Springer-Verlag, 1978, 537–551.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sadri, F., and Ullman, J. [1980] “Template Dependencies”, unpubl. manuscript, Stanford Univ., 1980.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zaniolo, C. [1976] “Analysis and Design of Relational Schemata for Databse Systems,” UCLA-ENG-7669, University of California, Los Angeles, 1976.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Paredaens
    • 1
  • D. Janssens
    • 1
  1. 1.University of AntwerpAntwerpBelgium

Personalised recommendations