skip to main content
10.1145/1559795.1559833acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmodConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Distributed XML design

Published:29 June 2009Publication History

ABSTRACT

A distributed XML document is an XML document that spans several machines or Web repositories. We assume that a distribution design of the document tree is given, providing an XML tree some of whose leaves are "docking points", to which XML subtrees can be attached. These subtrees may be provided and controlled by peers at remote locations, or may correspond to the result of function calls, e.g., Web services. If a global type τ, e.g. a DTD, is specified for a distributed document T, it would be most desirable to be able to break this type into a collection of local types, called a local typing, such that the document satisfies τ if and only if each peer (or function) satisfies its local type. In this paper we lay out the fundamentals of a theory of local typing and provide formal definitions of three main variants of locality: local typing, maximal local typing, and perfect typing, the latter being the most desirable. We study the following relevant decision problems: (i) given a typing for a design, determine whether it is local, maximal local, or perfect; (ii) given a design, establish whether a (maximal) local, or perfect typing does exist. For some of these problems we provide tight complexity bounds (polynomial space), while for the others we show exponential upper bounds. A main contribution is a polynomial-space algorithm for computing a perfect typing in this context, if it exists.

References

  1. S. Abiteboul, O. Benjelloun, and T. Milo. The Active XML project: an overview. The VLDB Journal, 17(5):1019--1040, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. S. Abiteboul, A. Bonifati, G. Cobéna, I. Manolescu, and T. Milo. Dynamic XML documents with distribution and replication. In SIGMOD '03: Proceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data, pages 527--538, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. S. Abiteboul, I. Manolescu, and E. Taropa. A framework for distributed XML data management. In Y. E. Ioannidis, M. H. Scholl, J. W. Schmidt, F. Matthes, M. Hatzopoulos, K. Bohm, A. Kemper, T. Grust, and C. Bohm, editors, EDBT, volume 3896 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 1049--1058. Springer, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. S. Abiteboul, T. Milo, and O. Benjelloun. Regular rewriting of Active XML and unambiguity. In Symposium on Principles of database systems, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. J.-M. Bremer and M. Gertz. On distributing XML repositories. In V. Christophides and J. Freire, editors, WebDB, pages 73--78, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. S. Ceri, P. Fraternali, and A. Bongio. Web modeling language (WebML): a modeling language for designing web sites. Comput. Netw., 33(1-6):137--157, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. S. Ceri, B. Pernici, and G. Wiederhold. An overview of research in the design of distributed databases. IEEE Database Eng. Bull., 7(4):46--51, 1984.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. J. Clark and M. Murata. RELAX NG Specification. OASIS, 1 edition, December 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. G. Ghelli, D. Colazzo, and C. Sartiani. Efficient inclusion for a class of XML types with interleaving and counting. In M. Arenas and M. I. Schwartzbach, editors, DBPL, volume 4797 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 231--245. Springer, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. P. Grosso and D. Veillard. XML fragment interchange. Internet Publication, Feb 2001. W3C Candidate Recommendation 12 February 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. C. Hagenah and A. Muscholl. Computing epsilon-free NFA from regular expressions in o(n log2(n)) time. In MFCS '98: Proceedings of the 23rd International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science, pages 277--285, London, UK, 1998. Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. L. O. Hernandez and M. Pegah. WebDAV: what it is, what it does, why you need it. In SIGUCCS '03: Proceedings of the 31st annual ACM SIGUCCS conference on User services, pages 249--254, New York, NY, USA, 2003. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. M. Holzer and M. Kutrib. State complexity of basic operations on nondeterministic finite automata. In J.-M. Champarnaud and D. Maurel, editors, CIAA, volume 2608 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 148--157. Springer, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. J. Hromkovic, S. Seibert, and T. Wilke. Translating regular expressions into small epsilon-free nondeterministic finite automata. In STACS '97: Proceedings of the 14th Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, pages 55--66, London, UK, 1997. Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. H. V. Jagadish, L. V. S. Lakshmanan, T. Milo, D. Srivastava, and D. Vista. Querying network directories. SIGMOD Rec., 28(2):133--144, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. W. Martens, F. Neven, and T. Schwentick. Complexity of decision problems for simple regular expressions. In J. Fiala, V. Koubek, and J. Kratochvil, editors, MFCS, volume 3153 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 889--900. Springer, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. M. T. Ozsu and P. Valduriez. Distributed database systems: Where are we now? Computer, 24(8):68--78, 1991. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Y. Papakonstantinou and V. Vianu. DTD inference for views of XML data. In PODS '00: Proceedings of the nineteenth ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART symposium on Principles of database systems, pages 35--46, New York, NY, USA, 2000. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. W. J. Savitch. Relationships between nondeterministic and deterministic tape complexities. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 4(2):177--192, 1970.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. H. Seidl. Deciding equivalence of finite tree automata. SIAM J. Comput., 19(3):424--437, 1990. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. L. J. Stockmeyer and A. R. Meyer. Word problems requiring exponential time(preliminary report). In STOC '73: Proceedings of the fifth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pages 1--9, New York, NY, USA, 1973. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. D. Suciu. Typechecking for semistructured data. In DBPL '01: Revised Papers from the 8th International Workshop on Database Programming Languages, pages 1--20, London, UK, 2002. Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. H. Thompson, D. Beech, M. Maloney, and N. Mendelsohn. XML schema part 1: Structures second edition. Internet Publication, Oct 2004. Recommendation, World Wide Web Consortium, Boston, Tokyo, Sophia Antipolis.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. M. Veanes. On computational complexity of basic decision problems of finite tree automata. Technical Report 133, Uppsala Programming Methodology and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Sweden, Jan. 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Distributed XML design

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          PODS '09: Proceedings of the twenty-eighth ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART symposium on Principles of database systems
          June 2009
          298 pages
          ISBN:9781605585536
          DOI:10.1145/1559795
          • General Chair:
          • Jan Paredaens,
          • Program Chair:
          • Jianwen Su

          Copyright © 2009 ACM

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 29 June 2009

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate476of1,835submissions,26%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader
        About Cookies On This Site

        We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

        Learn more

        Got it!