Abstract
Conjunctive queries are arguably the most widely used querying mechanism in practice and the most intensively studied one in database theory. Answering a conjunctive query (CQ) comes down to matching all atoms of the CQ simultaneously into the database. As a consequence, a CQ fails to provide any answer if the pattern described by the query does not exactly match the data. CQs might thus be too restrictive as a querying mechanism for data on the web, which is considered as inherently incomplete. The semantic web query language SPARQL therefore contains the OPTIONAL operator as a crucial feature. It allows the user to formulate queries which try to match parts of the query over the data if available, but do not destroy answers of the remaining query otherwise. In this article, we have a closer look at this optional matching feature of SPARQL. More specifically, we will survey several results which have recently been obtained for an interesting fragment of SPARQL – the so-called well-designed SPARQL graph patterns.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Abiteboul, S., Hull, R., Vianu, V.: Foundations of Databases. Addison Wesley, Boston (1995). http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/224822a68f8997f802f178bb7b146c6ff/algebradresden
Ahmetaj, S., Fischl, W., Pichler, R., Simkus, M., Skritek, S.: Towards reconciling SPARQL and certain answers. In: Proceedings of the WWW 2015, pp. 23–33. ACM (2015)
Angles, R., Gutierrez, C.: The expressive power of SPARQL. In: Sheth, A.P., Staab, S., Dean, M., Paolucci, M., Maynard, D., Finin, T., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5318, pp. 114–129. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Aranda, C.B., Arenas, M., Corcho, Ó., Polleres, A.: Federating queries in SPARQL 1.1: syntax, semantics and evaluation. J. Web Sem. 18(1), 1–17 (2013)
Arenas, M., Pérez, J.: Querying semantic web data with SPARQL. In: Proceedings of the PODS 2011, pp. 305–316. ACM (2011)
Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D.L., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.): The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)
Barceló, P., Libkin, L., Romero, M.: Efficient approximations of conjunctive queries. SIAM J. Comput. 43(3), 1085–1130 (2014)
Barceló, P., Pichler, R., Skritek, S.: Efficient evaluation and approximation of well-designed pattern trees. In: Proceedings of the PODS 2015, pp. 131–144. ACM (2015)
Calì, A., Gottlob, G., Kifer, M.: Taming the infinite chase: Query answering under expressive relational constraints. In: Proceedings of the KR 2008, pp. 70–80. AAAI Press (2008)
Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: Tractable reasoning and efficient query answering in description logics: The DL-Lite family. J. Autom. Reason. 39(3), 385–429 (2007)
Chandra, A.K., Merlin, P.M.: Optimal implementation of conjunctive queries in relational data bases. In: Proceedings of the STOC 1977, pp. 77–90. ACM (1977)
Chekuri, C., Rajaraman, A.: Conjunctive query containment revisited. Theor. Comput. Sci. 239(2), 211–229 (2000)
Cyganiak, R., Wood, D., Lanthaler, M.: RDF 1.1 concepts and abstract syntax. W3C Recommendation, W3C (2014). http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts
Glimm, B., Ogbuji, C.: SPARQL 1.1 Entailment Regimes. W3C Recommendation, W3C, March 2013. http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-entailment
Gottlob, G., Leone, N., Scarcello, F.: Hypertree decompositions and tractable queries. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 64(3), 579–627 (2002)
Greco, S., Spezzano, F., Trubitsyna, I.: Checking chase termination: Cyclicity analysis and rewriting techniques. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 27(3), 621–635 (2015)
Grohe, M., Marx, D.: Constraint solving via fractional edge covers. ACM Trans. Algor. 11(1), 4 (2014)
Harris, S., Seaborne, A.: SPARQL 1.1 Query Language. W3C Recommendation, W3C, March 2013. http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query
Kaminski, M., Kostylev, E.V.: Beyond well-designed SPARQL. In: Proceedings of the ICDT 2016 (to appear, 2016)
Kanza, Y., Nutt, W., Sagiv, Y.: Querying incomplete information in semistructured data. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 64(3), 655–693 (2002)
Klug, A.C.: On conjunctive queries containing inequalities. J. ACM 35(1), 146–160 (1988)
Kostylev, E.V., Reutter, J.L., Romero, M., Vrgoč, D.: SPARQL with Property Paths. In: Arenas, M., et al. (eds.) The Semantic Web - ISWC 2015. LNCS, vol. 9366, pp. 3–18. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)
Kostylev, E.V., Reutter, J.L., Ugarte, M.: CONSTRUCT queries in SPARQL. In: Proceedings of the ICDT 2015. LIPIcs, vol. 31, pp. 212–229 (2015)
Kröll, M., Pichler, R., Skritek, S.: On the complexity of enumerating the answers to well-designed pattern trees. In: Proceedings of the ICDT 2016 (to appear, 2016)
Letelier, A., Pérez, J., Pichler, R., Skritek, S.: Static analysis and optimization of semantic web queries. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 38(4), 25 (2013)
Meier, M.: On the termination of the chase algorithm. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Freiburg (2010). http://www.freidok.uni-freiburg.de/volltexte/7590/
Motik, B., Grau, B.C., Horrocks, I., Wu, Z., Fokoue, A., Lutz, C.: Owl 2 web ontology language: Profiles. W3C working draft, W3C, October 2008. http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-owl2-profiles-20081008/
Pérez, J., Arenas, M., Gutierrez, C.: Semantics and complexity of SPARQL. In: Cruz, I., Decker, S., Allemang, D., Preist, C., Schwabe, D., Mika, P., Uschold, M., Aroyo, L.M. (eds.) ISWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4273, pp. 30–43. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Pérez, J., Arenas, M., Gutierrez, C.: Semantics and complexity of SPARQL. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 34(3), 1–45 (2009)
Pichler, R., Skritek, S.: Containment and equivalence of well-designed SPARQL. In: Proceedings of the PODS 2014, pp. 39–50. ACM (2014)
Pichler, R., Skritek, S.: On the hardness of counting the solutions of SPARQL queries. In: Proceedings of the AMW 2014. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 1189. CEUR-WS.org (2014)
Polleres, A.: From SPARQl to rules (and back). In: Proceedings of the WWW 2007, pp. 787–796. ACM (2007)
Prud’hommeaux, E., Seaborne, A.: SPARQL Query Language for RDF. W3C Recommendation, W3C (2008). http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/
Sagiv, Y., Yannakakis, M.: Equivalences among relational expressions with the union and difference operators. J. ACM 27(4), 633–655 (1980)
Schmidt, M., Meier, M., Lausen, G.: Foundations of SPARQL query optimization. In: Proceedings of the ICDT 2010, pp. 4–33. ACM (2010)
Yannakakis, M.: Algorithms for acyclic database schemes. In: Proceedings of the VLDB 1981, pp. 82–94. IEEE Computer Society (1981)
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the Vienna Science and Technology Fund (WWTF), project ICT12-15 and by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF): P25207-N23 and W1255-N23.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ahmetaj, S., Fischl, W., Kröll, M., Pichler, R., Šimkus, M., Skritek, S. (2016). The Challenge of Optional Matching in SPARQL. In: Gyssens, M., Simari, G. (eds) Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems. FoIKS 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9616. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30024-5_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30024-5_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-30023-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-30024-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)