Advertisement

A Simple XSLT Processor for Distributed XML

  • Hiroki Mizumoto
  • Nobutaka Suzuki
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7808)

Abstract

Recently, the sizes of XML documents have rapidly been increasing, and due to geographical and administrative reasons XML documents are tend to be partitioned into fragments and managed separately in plural sites. Such a form of XML documents is called distributed XML. In this paper, we propose a method for performing XSLT transformation efficiently for distributed XML documents. Our method assumes that the expressive power of XSLT is restricted to unranked top-down tree transducer, and all the sites storing an XML fragment perform an XSLT transformation in parallel. We implemented our method in Ruby and made evaluation experiments. This result suggests that our method is more efficient than a centralized approach.

Keywords

Root Node Root Fragment Path Query Tree Transducer Transformation Result 
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.
    Abiteboul, S., Gottlob, G., Manna, M.: Distributed XML design. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 77(6), 936–964 (2011)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abiteboul, S., Gottlob, G., Manna, M.: Distributed XML design. In: Proc. PODS 2009 Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pp. 247–258 (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bremer, J.M., Gertz, M.: On distributing XML repositories. In: Proc. of WebDB, pp. 73–78 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Buneman, P., Cong, G., Fan, W., Kementsietsidis, A.: Using partial evaluation in distributed query evaluation. In: Proc. VLDB 2006 (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cong, G., Fan, W., Anastasios: Distributed Query Evaluation with Performance Guarantees. In: Proc. SIGMOD 2007 Proceedings of the 2007 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pp. 509–520 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kepser, S.: A simple proof for the Turing-completeness of XSLT and XQuery. In: Extreme Markup Languages (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kling, P., Özsu, M.T., Daudjee, K.: Generating efficient execution plans for vertically partitioned XML databases. Proc. VLDB Endow. 4(1), 1–11 (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Martens, W., Neven, F.: Typechecking Top-Down Uniform Unranked Tree Transducers. In: Calvanese, D., Lenzerini, M., Motwani, R. (eds.) ICDT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2572, pp. 64–78. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schmidt, A., Waas, F., Kersten, M., Carey, M.J., Manolescu, I., Busse, R.: Xmark: a benchmark for XML data management. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, Proc. VLDB 2002, pp. 974–985 (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stefanescu, D.C., Thomo, A., Thomo, L.: Distributed evaluation of generalized path queries. In: Proc. the 2005 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, SAC 2005, pp. 610–616 (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Suciu, D.: Distributed query evaluation on semistructured data. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 27(1), 1–62 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zavoral, F., Dvorakovam, J.: Perfomance of XSLT processors on large data sets. In: Proc. Applications of Digital Information and Web Technologies, pp. 110–115 (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hiroki Mizumoto
    • 1
  • Nobutaka Suzuki
    • 1
  1. 1.University of TsukubaTsukubaJapan

Personalised recommendations