An Object-Oriented Framework for Managing Cooperating Legacy Databases

  • H. Balsters
  • E. O de Brock
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2817)


We describe a general semantic framework for precise specification of so-called database federations. A database federation provides for tight coupling of a collection of heterogeneous legacy databases into a global integrated system. Our approach to database federation is based on the UML/OCL data model, and aims at the integration of the underlying database schemas of the component legacy systems to a separate, newly defined integrated database schema. Our approach to coupling of component databases into a global, integrated system is based on mediation. Our major result is that mediation in combination with a so-called integration isomorphism integrates component schemas without loss of constraint information; i.e., constraint information available at the component level remains intact after integration on the level of the virtual federated database. Our approach to integration also allows for specification of additional inter-database constraints between the component databases.


Object Constraint Language Constraint Information Semantic Heterogeneity Component Frame Enterprise Application Integration 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Akehurst, D.H., Bordbar, B.: On Querying UML data models with OCL. In: Gogolla, M., Kobryn, C. (eds.) UML 2001. LNCS, vol. 2185, p. 91. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Balsters, H.: Derived classes as a basis for views in UML/OCL data models: SOM Report 02A47, University of Groningen (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Balsters, H.: Object-oriented modeling and design of database federations: SOM Report 03A18, University of Groningen (2003) Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blaha, M., Premerlani, W.: Object-oriented modeling and design for database applications. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1998)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Demuth, B., Hussmann, H.: Using UML/OCL constraints for relational database design. In: France, R.B., Rumpe, B. (eds.) UML 1999. LNCS, vol. 1723, pp. 598–613. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hull, R.: Managing Semantic Heterogeneity in Databases: ACM PODS 1997. ACM Press, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kent, W.: Solving domain mismatch and schema mismatch problems with an object oriented database programming language. In: VLDB 1997 (1997)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Response to the UML 2.0 OCL RfP, Revised Submission, Version 1.6 (January 6, 2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Reiter, R.: Towards a logical reconstruction of relational database theory. In: Brodie, M.L., Mylopoulos, J., Schmidt, J.W. (eds.) On conceptual modelling. LNCS, vol. 2185, Springer, Berlin (1984)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sheth, A.P., Larson, J.A.: Federated database systems for managing distributed and heterogeneous and autonomous databases. ACM Computing Surveys 22 (1990)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vermeer, M.: Semantic interoperability for legacy databases. Ph.D.-thesis, University of Twente (1997)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wiederhold, G.: Value-added mediation in large-scale information systems IFIP Data Semantics (DS-6) (1995) Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Warmer, J.B., Kleppe, A.G.: The object constraint language. Addison Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Balsters
    • 1
  • E. O de Brock
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Management and OrganizationUniversity of GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations