An Architecture for Managing Database Evolution

  • Eladio Domínguez
  • Jorge Lloret
  • María Antonia Zapata
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2784)


This paper presents an architecture for managing database evolution when all the components of the database (conceptual schema, logical schema and extension) are available. The strategy of evolution in which our architecture is based is that of ‘forward database maintenance’, that is, changes are applied to the conceptual schema and propagated automatically down to the logical schema and to the extension. In order to put into practice this strategy, each component of a database is seen under this architecture as the information base of an information system. Furthermore, a translation information system is considered in order to manage the translation of conceptual elements into logical schema elements. A current Oracle implementation of this architecture is also presented.


Information Systems Database Evolution Forward Database Maintenance Meta-modelling 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Al-Jadir, L., Léonard, M.: Multiobjects to Ease Schema Evolution in an OODBMS. In: Ling, T.-W., Ram, S., Li Lee, M. (eds.) ER 1998. LNCS, vol. 1507, pp. 316–333. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Claypool, K.T., Rundensteiner, E.A., Heineman, G.T.: ROVER: A Framework for the Evolution of Relationships. In: Laender, A.H.F., Liddle, S.W., Storey, V.C. (eds.) ER 2000. LNCS, vol. 1920, pp. 409–422. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Domínguez, E., Zapata, M.A., Rubio, J.J.: Conceptual Approach to Metamodelling. In: Olivé, À., Pastor, J.A. (eds.) CAiSE 1997. LNCS, vol. 1250, pp. 319–332. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Elmasri, R.A., Navathe, S.B.: Fundamentals of Database Systems, 3rd edn. Addison- Wesley, London (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    van Griethuysen, J.J. (ed.): Concepts and Terminology for the Conceptual Schema and the Information Base, Mars 1982. Publ. ISO/TC97/SV5-N695 (1982)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hainaut, J.L., Englebert, V., Henrard, J., Hick, J.M., Roland, D.: Database Evolution: The DB-MAIN approach. In: Loucopoulos, P. (ed.) ER 1994. LNCS, vol. 881, pp. 112–131. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Halpin, T.A., Proper, H.A.: Database Schema Transformation and Optimization. In: Papazoglou, M.P. (ed.) ER 1995 and OOER 1995. LNCS, vol. 1021, pp. 191–203. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hick, J.M., Hainaut, J.L., Englebert, V., Roland, D., et al.: Strategies pour l’evolution des applications de bases de donnes relationelles: L’approche DB-MAIN. In: Proceedings XVIII Congres Inforsid, La Garde, France (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Laender, A.H.F., Casanova, M.A., de Carvalho, A.P., Ridolfi, L.F.G.G.M.: An Analysis of SQL Integrity Constraints from an Entity-Relationship Perspective. Information Systems 10(4), 331–358 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    López, J.R., Olivé, A.: A Framework for the Evolution of Temporal Conceptual Schemas of Information Systems. In: Wangler, B., Bergman, L.D. (eds.) CAiSE 2000. LNCS, vol. 1789, pp. 369–386. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nicolle, C., Benslimane, D., Yetongnon, K.: Multi–Data Models Translations in Interoperable Information Systems. In: Constantopoulos, P., Vassiliou, Y., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) CAiSE 1996. LNCS, vol. 1080, pp. 1–21. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oei, J.L.H., Proper, H.A., Falkenberg, E.D.: Evolving Information Systems: Meeting the ever–changing environment. Information Systems Journal 4(3), 213–233 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    OMG, UML specification version 1.4, formal/01–09–67 (2001),
  14. 14.
    Proper, H.A., van der Weide, T.P.: Information Disclosure in Evolving Information Systems: Taking a Shot at a Moving Target. Data & Knowledge Engineering 15, 135–168 (1995)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Roddick, J.F., Craske, N.G., Richards, T.J.: A Taxonomy for Schema Versioning Based on the Relational and Entity Relationship Models. In: Elmasri, R.A., Kouramajian, V., Thalheim, B. (eds.) ER 1993. LNCS, vol. 823, pp. 137–148. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    da Silva, A.S., Laender, A.H.F., Casanova, M.A.: An Approach to Maintaining Optimized Relational Representations of Entity-Relationship Schemas. In: Thalheim, B. (ed.) ER 1996. LNCS, vol. 1157, pp. 292–308. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Urman, S.: Oracle 9i PL/SQL Programming, Osborne (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eladio Domínguez
    • 1
  • Jorge Lloret
    • 1
  • María Antonia Zapata
    • 1
  1. 1.Dpt. de Informática e Ingeniería de SistemasFacultad de Ciencias, Universidad de ZaragozaZaragozaSpain

Personalised recommendations