Advertisement

A Distributed Rule Mechanism for Multidatabase Systems

  • Vasiliki Kantere
  • John Mylopoulos
  • Iluju Kiringa
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2888)

Abstract

We describe a mechanism based on distributed Event-Condition-Action (ECA) rules that supports data coordination in a multidatabase setting. The proposed mechanism includes an ECA rule language and a rule execution engine that transforms and partitions rules when they are first posted, and then coordinates their execution. The paper also presents a prototype implementation in a simulated environment as well as preliminary experimental results on its performance. This work is part of an on-going project intended to develop data coordination techniques for peer-to-peer databases.

Keywords

Global Evaluation Condition Part Event Algebra Composite Event Execution Model 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Arizio, B.B., Demarie, M.L., Limongiello, A., Mussa, P.L.: Managing inter-database dependencies with rules + quasi-transactions. In: 3rd Intern. Workshop on Research Issues in Data Engineering: Interoperability in Multidatabase Systems, Vienna, pp. 34–41 (1993)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arenas, M., Kantere, V., Kementsietsidis, A., Kiringa, I., Miller, R.J., Mylopoulos, J.: The Hyperion Project: From Data Integration to Data Coordination. In: SIGMOD Rec. (September 2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bernstein, P., Giunchiglia, F., Kementsietsidis, A., Mylopoulos, J., Serafini, L.: Data Management for Peer-to-Peer Computing: A Vision. In: Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Databases and the Web (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    von Bültzingslöwen, G., et al.: ECA Functionality in a Distributed Environment. In: Active Rules in Database Systems, pp. 147–175. Springer, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cilia, M., Bornhövd, C., Buchmann, A.P.: Moving Active Functionality from Centralized to Open Distributed Heterogeneous Environments. In: Proceedings of Cooperative Information Systems, 9th Conference, Trento, Italy, September 5-7, pp. 195–210 (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chakravarthy, S., Liao, H.: Asynchronous monitoring of events for distributed cooperative environments. In: Intern. Symp. on Coop. Database Sys. for Advanced Applications (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chawathe, S., Garcia-Molina, H., Widom, J.: Flexible constraint management for autonomous distributed databases. Bulletin of the IEEE Technical Committee on Data Engineering 17(2), 23–27 (1994)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Collet. The NODS Project: Networked Open Database Services. In: Proceedings of the Intern. Symposium on Objects and Databases, Sophia Antipolis, pp. 153–169 (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gatziu, S., Koschel, A., von Bültzingsloewen, G., Fritschi, H.: Unbundling Active Functionality. SIGMOD Record 27(1), 35–40 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zimmer, D., Unland, R.: On the semantics of complex events in active database management systems. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Data Engineering (1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kantere, V.: A Rule Mechanism for P2P Data Management, Tech. Rep. CSRG-469, University of Toronto (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kantere, V., Kiringa, I., Mylopoulos, J., Kementsietsidis, A., Arenas, M.: Coordinating Peer Databases Using ECA Rules. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Databases, Information Systems and P2P Computing, Berlin (September 2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kementsietsidis, A., Arenas, M., Miller, R.J.: Mapping Data in Peer-to-Peer Systems: Semantics and Algorithmic Issues. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD Intern. Conference on Management of Data, San Diego (June 2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Karabatis, G., Rusinkiewicz, M., Sheth, A.: Aeolos: A System for the Management of Interdependent Data. In: Elmagarmid, A., Rusinkiewicz, M., Sheth, A. (eds.) Management of Heterogeneous and Autonomous Database Systems, ch. 8. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Koschel, A., Lockermann, P.C.: Distributed events in active database systems: Letting the genie out of the bottle. Data & Knowledge Engineering 25, 11–28 (1998)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lakshmanan, L., Sadri, F., Subramanian, S.: SchemaSQL: an Extension to SQL for Multidatabase Interoperability. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 26(4) (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ng, W.S., Ooi, B.C., Tan, K.L., Zhou, A.Y.: PeerDB: a P2P-based System for Distributed Data Sharing. Tech. Report, University of Singapore (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Turker, C., Conrad, S.: Towards maintaining integrity in federated databases. In: 3rd Basque Intern. Workshop on Information Technology Biarritz (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vasiliki Kantere
    • 1
  • John Mylopoulos
    • 1
  • Iluju Kiringa
    • 2
  1. 1.University of TorontoTorontoCanada
  2. 2.University of OttawaOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations