Advertisement

Supporting physical independence in an Object Database Server

  • Nicola Aloia
  • Svetlana Barneva
  • Fausto Rabitti
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 615)

Abstract

An approach for supporting physical independence in Object Database Servers is proposed in this paper. While in current implementations the strategy for storing data objects reflects the logical object definitions, a certain degree of independence in the physical database organization would be essential to meet specific performance requirements. In this paper, a canonical object data model and a storage object data model are presented. In the first, the objects are organized in classes; in the second, physical objects with similar structures are grouped in collections. Mechanisms for mapping data structures and operations from the logical level to the physical level are discussed, and a comprehensive example is given.

Keywords

Physical Object Storage Level Object Database Vertical Partitioning Generalization Class 
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.
    Albano A., Cardelli R. and Orsini R. “Galileo: a Strongly Typed, Interactive Conceptual Language.” ACM Transactions on Database Systems, Vol. 10, No. 2, 1985, pp. 230–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aloia N., Barneva S., and Rabitti F. “Supporting Physical Independence in Object Databases.” Technical Report FIDE/90/33, ESPRIT BRA Project No. 3070, FIDE (Formally Integrated Data Environment), Nov. 1991.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bertino E. and Kim W. “Indexing Techniques for Queries on Nested Objects.” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 2, June 1989, pp. 196–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bretl R., Maier D., Otis A., Penney J., Schuchard B., Stein J., Williams E. H., and Williams M. “The Gem-Stone Data Management System.” In Object-Oriented Concepts, Databases, and Applications, edited by Won Kim and Frederick H. Lochovsky, ACM Press Frontier Series, 1989, pp. 283–308.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Deux O. et al. “The Story of 02”. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, Vol. 2, No. 1, March 1990.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fishman D. H. et al. “IRIS: an Object-Oriented DBMS.” ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, Vol. 5, No. 1, Jan. 1987.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim W., Ballou N., Chou H. T., Garza J. F., and Woelk D. “Features of the ORION Object-Oriented Database.” In Object-Oriented Concepts, Databases, and Applications, edited by Won Kim and Frederick H. Lochovsky, ACM Press Frontier Series, 1989, pp. 251–282.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Teorey, T. e Fry J. P. “Design of Database Structures” Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1982Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Valduriez P. “Join Indices.” ACM Transactions on Database Systems, Vol. 12, No. 2, June 1987, pp. 218–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zezula P. and Rabitti F, “High Performance Object Store.” Technical Report FIDE/90/4, ESPRIT BRA Project No. 3070, FIDE (Formally Integrated Data Environment), Dec. 1990.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zezula P. and Rabitti F. “Navigation Index for Object Stores.” Technical Report FIDE/90/25, ESPRIT BRA Project No. 3070, FIDE (Formally Integrated Data Environment), Aug. 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicola Aloia
    • 2
  • Svetlana Barneva
    • 1
  • Fausto Rabitti
    • 1
  1. 1.IEI-CNRPisaItaly
  2. 2.CNUCE-CNRPisaItaly

Personalised recommendations