Compiling mappings to bridge applications and databases

ABSTRACT

Translating data and data access operations between applications and databases is a longstanding data management problem. We present a novel approach to this problem, in which the relationship between the application data and the persistent storage is specified using a declarative mapping, which is compiled into bidirectional views that drive the data transformation engine. Expressing the application model as a view on the database is used to answer queries, while viewing the database in terms of the application model allows us to leverage view maintenance algorithms for update translation. This approach has been implemented in a commercial product. It enables developers to interact with a relational database via a conceptual schema and an object oriented programming surface. We outline the implemented system and focus on the challenges of mapping compilation, which include rewriting queries under constraints and supporting non-relational constructs.

REFERENCES

• 1: A. Adya, J. A. Blakeley, S. Melnik, S. Muralidhar, The ADO.NET Team. Anatomy of the ADO.NET Entity Framework. In SIGMOD, 2007.
• 2: F. Bancilhon , N. Spyratos, Update semantics of relational views, ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), v.6 n.4, p.557-575, Dec. 1981 [doi>10.1145/319628.319634]
• 3: T. Barsalou, A. M. Keller, N. Siambela, G. Wiederhold. Updating Relational Databases through Object-Based Views. In SIGMOD, 1991.
• 4: P. A. Bernstein, T. J. Green, S. Melnik, A. Nash. Implementing Mapping Composition. In VLDB, 2006.
• 5: P. A. Bernstein, S. Melnik. Model Management 2.0: Manipulating Richer Mappings. In SIGMOD, 2007.
• 6: J. A. Blakeley, P.-Å. Larson, F. W. Tompa. Efficiently Updating Materialized Views. In SIGMOD, 1986.
• 7: A. Bohannon, B. C. Pierce, J. A. Vaughan. Relational Lenses: A Language for Updatable Views. In PODS, 2006.
• 8: V. P. Braganholo, S. B. Davidson, C. A. Heuser. From XML View Updates to Relational View Updates: Old Solutions to a New Problem. In VLDB, 2004.
• 9: M. J. Carey, D. D. Chamberlin, S. Narayanan, B. Vance,D. Doole, S. Rielau, R. Swagerman, N. M. Mattos. O-O, What Have They Done to DB2? In VLDB, 1999.
• 10: M. J. Carey, D. J. DeWitt. Of Objects and Databases: A Decade of Turmoil. In VLDB. Morgan Kaufmann, 1996.
• 11: P. Castro, S. Melnik, A. Adya. ADO.NET Entity Framework: Raising the Level of Abstraction in Data Programming. In SIGMOD (demo), 2007.
• 12: W. R. Cook, A. H. Ibrahim. Integrating Programming Languages and Databases: What is the Problem? ODBMS.ORG, Expert Article, Sept. 2006.
• 13: U. Dayal, P. A. Bernstein. On the Updatability of Relational Views. In VLDB, 1978.
• 14: Robert A. Di Paola, The Recursive Unsolvability of the Decision Problem for the Class of Definite Formulas, Journal of the ACM (JACM), v.16 n.2, p.324-327, April 1969 [doi>10.1145/321510.321524]
• 15: Ronald Fagin , Phokion G. Kolaitis , Lucian Popa , Wang-Chiew Tan, Composing schema mappings: Second-order dependencies to the rescue, ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), v.30 n.4, p.994-1055, December 2005 [doi>10.1145/1114244.1114249]
• 16: J. N. Foster, M. B. Greenwald, J. T. Moore, B. C. Pierce, A. Schmitt. Combinators for Bi-Directional Tree Transformations: A Linguistic Approach to the View Update Problem. In POPL, 2005.
• 17: Georg Gottlob , Paolo Paolini , Roberto Zicari, Properties and update semantics of consistent views, ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), v.13 n.4, p.486-524, Dec. 1988 [doi>10.1145/49346.50068]
• 18: G. Gou, M. Kormilitsin, R. Chirkova. Query Evaluation Using Overlapping Views: Completeness and Efficiency. In SIGMOD, 2006.
• 19: S. Grimes. Object/Relational Reality Check. Database Programming & Design (DBPD), 11(7), July 1998.
• 20: A. Gupta, I. S. Mumick. Maintenance of Materialized Views: Problems, Techniques, and Applications. IEEE Data Eng. Bull., 18(2):3--18, 1995.
• 21: Alon Y. Halevy, Answering queries using views: A survey, The VLDB Journal — The International Journal on Very Large Data Bases, v.10 n.4, p.270-294, December 2001 [doi>10.1007/s007780100054]
• 22: C. Keene. Data Services for Next-Generation SOAs. SOA WebServices Journal, 4(12), 2004.
• 23: A. M. Keller, R. Jensen, S. Agrawal. Persistence Software: Bridging Object-Oriented Programming and Relational Databases. In SIGMOD, 1993.
• 24: Y. Kotidis, D. Srivastava, Y. Velegrakis. Updates Through Views: A New Hope. In ICDE, 2006.
• 25: V. Krishnamurthy, S. Banerjee, A. Nori. Bringing Object-Relational Technology to Mainstream. In SIGMOD,1999.
• 26: E. Meijer, B. Beckman, G. M. Bierman. LINQ: Reconciling Object, Relations and XML in the .NET Framework. In SIGMOD, 2006.
• 27: R. J. Miller, L. M. Haas, M. A. Hernández. Schema Mapping as Query Discovery. In VLDB, 2000.
• 28: A. Nash, P. A. Bernstein, S. Melnik. Composition of Mappings Given by Embedded Dependencies. In PODS, 2005.
• 29: L. Segoufin, V. Vianu. Views and Queries: Determinacy and Rewriting. In PODS, 2005.
• 30: W. Zhang, N. Ritter. The Real Benefits of Object-Relational DB-Technology for Object-Oriented Software Development. In BNCOD, 2001.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.2 DATABASE MANAGEMENT

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.3 PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES

General Terms:
Algorithms, Design, Languages, Performance

Keywords:
mapping, query rewriting, updateable views