On complementary and independent mappings on databases

ABSTRACT

We define the notion of independent views to indicate whether the range values of the two views may be achieved independently The concept of complementary views indicates when the domain element can be uniquely determined by the range values of the two complementary views We consider the relationship between independent and complementary views In unrestricted domains, a view (but not the identity or empty view) can have more than one complementary, independent view Databases, however, are more restricted domains They are finite power sets A view is monotonic if it preserves inclusion However, in finite power sets when all views are monotonic, if a given view has another view which is independent and complementary, then this view is unique.

REFERENCES

• 1: {Bancilhon 79} F Bancilhon, "Supporting View Updates in Relational Data Bases," in Data Base Architecture, Bracci and Nijssen, eds, North Holland, June 1979.
• 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: {Birkhoff 67} Garrett Birkhoff, Lattice Theory, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, Colloquium Publications, Volume 25, 1967
• 4: {Carlson 79} C Robert Carlson and Adarsh K Arora, "The Updatability of Relational Views Based on Functional Dependencies," Third International Computer Software and Applications Conference, IEEE Computer Society, Chicago, IL, November 1979
• 5: {Davidson 81} Jim Davidson and S Jerrold Kaplan, "Natural Language Access to Databases: Interpretation of Update Requests," Proc 7th Int. Joint Conf on Artificial Intelligence, Vancouver, B C, August 1981
• 6: {Dayal 78} U Dayal and P. A Bernstein, "On the Updatability of Relational Views," Proc Fourth VLDB Conf, IEEE Computer Society, Berlin, West Germany, October 1978.
• 7: {Dayal 79} Umeshwar Dayal, Schema-Mapping Problems in Database systems, Aiken Computation Laboratory, Harvard University, TR-11-79, Ph.D. dissertation, August 1979.
• 8: Umeshwar Dayal , Philip A. Bernstein, On the correct translation of update operations on relational views, ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), v.7 n.3, p.381-416, Sept. 1982 [doi>10.1145/319732.319740]
• 9: {Furtado 79} A L Furtado, K C Sevcik, and C. S DOS Santos, "Permitting Updates Through Views of Data Bases," Inform Systems, 4, 4, Pergamon Press, Great Britain, 1979
• 10: {Halmos 60} Paul R Halmos, Naive Set Theory, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1960.
• 11: S. Jerrold Kaplan , Jim Davidson, Interpreting natural language database updates, Proceedings of the 19th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, June 29-July 01, 1981, Stanford, California [doi>10.3115/981923.981961]
• 12: {Keller 82} Arthur M Keller, "Updates to Relational Databases Through Views Involving Joins," in Improving Database Usability and Responsiveness, Peter Scheuermann, ed, Academic Press, New York, 1982
• 13: Jorma Rissanen, Independent components of relations, ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), v.2 n.4, p.317-325, Dec. 1977 [doi>10.1145/320576.320580]
• 14: Michael Stonebraker, Implementation of integrity constraints and views by query modification, Proceedings of the 1975 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data, May 14-16, 1975, San Jose, California [doi>10.1145/500080.500091]
• 15: Jeffrey D. Ullman, Principles of Database Systems, W. H. Freeman & Co., New York, NY, 1983

INDEX TERMS

Keywords:
complementary mappings, database theory, independent mappings, relational databases, view update