Performance Evaluation of Integrity Control in a Parallel Main-Memory Database System

  • Paul W. P. J. Grefen
  • Jan Flokstra
  • Peter M. G. Apers
Conference paper


Integrity control is an important task of modern database management systems. One of the key problems impeding its general use in real-world applications is formed by the high processing costs associated with integrity constraint enforcement. Notwithstanding this observation, little attention has been paid in literature to the performance evaluation of integrity control mechanisms. This paper adresses this issue and has a threefold message. Firstly, it shows that integrity control can easily be integrated in a parallel, main-memory database system. Secondly, it demonstrates that parallelism and main-memory data storage are effective ways to deal with costly constraint enforcement. Thirdly, the overhead of constraint enforcement is shown to be acceptable compared to the execution of transactions without integrity control. The conclusion is drawn, that integrity control is well feasible in high-performance database systems.


Integrity Constraint Trans Action Integrity Control User Transaction Transaction Execution 
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]
    P.M.G. Apers, C.A. v.d. Berg, J. Flokstra, P.W.P.J. Grefen, M.L. Kersten, A. N. Wilschut; PRISMA/DB: A Parallel, Main-Memory Relational DBMS; Memorandum INF92-12; University of Twente, 1992.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    D. Badal, G. Popek; Cost and Performance Analysis of Semantic Integrity Validation Methods; Proc. 1979 ACM SIGMOD Int. Conf. on the Management of Data; Boston, 1979.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    D. Bitton, D.J. DeWitt, C. Turbyfill; Benchmarking Database Systems: A Systematic Approach; Proc. 9th Int. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases; Florence, 1983.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    P.W.P.J. Grefen, P.M.G. Apers; Parallel Handling of Integrity Constraints on Fragmented Relations; Proc. Int. Symp. on Databases in Parallel and Distributed Systems; Dublin, 1990.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    P.W.P.J. Grefen, P.M.G. Apers; Integrity Constraint Enforcement through Transaction Modification; Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. on Database and Expert Systems Applications; Berlin, 1991.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    P.W.P.J. Grefen, P.M.G. Apers; Dynamic Action Scheduling in a Parallel Database System; Proc. Conf. on Parallel Architectures and Languages Europe; Paris, 1992.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    E. Simon, P. Valduriez; Design and Implementation of an Extendible Integrity Subsystem; Proc. 1984 ACM SIGMOD Int. Conf. on the Management of Data; Boston, 1984.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    E. Simon, P. Valduriez; Design and Analysis of a Relational Integrity Subsystem; MCC Technical Report Number DB-015-87; MCC, Austin, 1987.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    M. Stonebraker; Implementation of Integrity Constraints and Views by Query Modification; Proc. 1975 ACM SIGMOD Int. Conf. on the Management of Data; San Jose, 1975.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    M. Stonebraker, L. A. Rowe, M. Hirohama; The Implementation of POSTGRES; IEEE Trans. on Knowledge and Data Engineering, Vol 2, No. 1, 1990.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    J. Widom, R. J. Cochrane, B. G. Lindsay; Implementing Set-Oriented Production Rules as an Extension to Starburst; Proc. 17th Int. Conf. on Very Large Data Bases; Barcelona, 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag/Wien 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul W. P. J. Grefen
    • 1
  • Jan Flokstra
    • 1
  • Peter M. G. Apers
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Twentethe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations