Cost and performance analysis of semantic integrity validation methods

ABSTRACT

A principal problem with dynamic validation of transactions with respect to a set of integrity assertions is the cost associated with the evaluation of such assertions. Although several methods of dynamic validation of transactions have been proposed there has been little attempt to analyze and to compare the performance of different validation methods. In this paper we evaluate compile time, run time, postexecution time, and mixed (run time --- postexecution time) validation methods for two semantic integrity subsystem designs. In one case we assume that the arguments of all integrity assertions are stored in secondary slow access memory and in the second we assume that the database is partitioned so that some data used for transaction validation are stored in fast access form.

REFERENCES

• 1: Dusan Zdenek Badal, Semantic integrity, consistency and concurrency control in distributed databases., 1979
• 2: ESW 75 Eswaran, K. P. and Chamberlin, D. D. "Functional specification of a subsystem for data base integrity," IBM Research Report RJ 1601, June 1975.
• 3: ESW 76 Eswaran, K. P. "Specifications, implementations and interactions of a trigger subsystem in an integrated database system," IBM Research Report RJ 1820, November 1976.
• 4: FLO 74 Florentin, J. J. "Consistency auditing of data bases," Computer Journal 17, 2 (1974), pp. 52--58.
• 5: GRA 75 Graves, R. W. "Integrity control in a relational data description language," Proc. of ACM Pacific Conference, San Francisco, April 1975, pp. 108--113.
• 6: Michael Hammer , Sunil K. Sarin, Efficient monitoring of database assertions, Proceedings of the 1978 ACM SIGMOD international conference on management of data, May 31-June 02, 1978, Austin, Texas [doi>10.1145/509252.509290]
• 7: KIN 77 King, W. F. "System R implementations," UCLA, Computer Science Dept. Seminar, Fall 1977.
• 8: MAC 76 Machgeles, C. "A procedural language for expressing integrity constraints in the coexistence model," Modelling in Data Base Management Systems, ed. by G. M. Nijssen, Amsterdam, North-Holland, 1976, pp. 293--301.
• 9: D. McLeod, HIGH LEVEL EXPRESSION OF SEMANTIC INTEGRITY SPECIFICATIONS IN A RELATIONAL DATA BASE SYSTEM, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, 1976
• 10: N. Minsky, On interaction with data bases, Proceedings of the 1974 ACM SIGFIDET (now SIGMOD) workshop on Data description, access and control, p.51-62, May 01-03, 1974, Ann Arbor, Michigan [doi>10.1145/800296.811504]
• 11: STO 74 Stonebraker, M. "High level integrity assurance in relational data management systems," Electr. Res. Lab. Memo ERL-M473, UC Berkeley, August 1974.
• 12: STO 75 Stonebraker, M. "Implementation of integrity constraints and views by query modification," Electronics Res. Lab. Memo ERL-M514, UC Berkeley, March 1975.
• 13: STO 76 Stonebraker, M. and Neuhold, E. "A distributed data base version of INGRES," Electronics Res. Lab. Memo ERL-M612, UC Berkeley, September 1976.
• 14: Joost S. M. Verhofstad, Recovery Techniques for Database Systems, ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), v.10 n.2, p.167-195, June 1978 [doi>10.1145/356725.356730]
• 15: WEB 76 Weber, H. "A semantic model of integrity constraints on a relational data base," Modelling in Data Base Management Systems, ed. by G. M. Nijssen, Amsterdam, North-Holland, 1976, pp. 269--293.
• 16: ZLO 74 Zloof, M. M. "Query by example," IBM Research Report RC 4917, July 1974.

INDEX TERMS

Keywords:
cost analysis, database management, integrity assertions, performance analysis, semantic integrity