skip to main content
10.1145/1989284.1989309acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmodConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Determining relevance of accesses at runtime

Published:13 June 2011Publication History

ABSTRACT

Consider the situation where a query is to be answered using Web sources that restrict the accesses that can be made on backend relational data by requiring some attributes to be given as input of the service. The accesses provide lookups on the collection of attributes values that match the binding. They can differ in whether or not they require arguments to be generated from prior accesses. Prior work has focused on the question of whether a query can be answered using a set of data sources, and in developing static access plans (e.g., Datalog programs) that implement query answering. We are interested in dynamic aspects of the query answering problem: given partial information about the data, which accesses could provide relevant data for answering a given query? We consider immediate and long-term notions of "relevant accesses", and ascertain the complexity of query relevance, for both conjunctive queries and arbitrary positive queries. In the process, we relate dynamic relevance of an access to query containment under access limitations and characterize the complexity of this problem; we produce several complexity results about containment that are of interest by themselves.

References

  1. S. Abiteboul, P. Bourhis, and B. Marinoiu. Satisfiability and relevance for queries over active documents. In PODS, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. S. Abiteboul, R. Hull, and V. Vianu. Foundations of Databases. Addison-Wesley, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. M. Benedikt, G. Gottlob, and P. Senellart. Determining relevance of accesses at runtime (extended version). CoRR, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. A. Cali, D. Calvanese, and D. Martinenghi. Dynamic query optimization under access limitations and dependencies. J. UCS, 15(1):33--62, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. A. Cali and D. Martinenghi. Conjunctive query containment under access limitations. In ER, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. A. Cali and D. Martinenghi. Querying data under access limitations. In ICDE, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. D. Calvanese, G. D. Giacomo, M. Lenzerini, and M. Y. Vardi. Containment of conjunctive regular path queries with inverse. In KR, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. A. K. Chandra and P. M. Merlin. Optimal implementation of conjunctive queries in relational data bases. In STOC, Boulder, USA, 1977. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. S. Chaudhuri and M. Y. Vardi. On the complexity of equivalence between recursive and nonrecursive Datalog programs. In PODS, 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. S. Chaudhuri and M. Y. Vardi. On the equivalence of recursive and nonrecursive Datalog programs. JCSS, 54(1):61--78, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. S. S. Cosmadakis, H. Gaifman, P. C. Kanellakis, and M. Y. Vardi. Decidable optimization problems for database logic programs. In STOC, 1988. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. A. Deutsch, B. Ludascher, and A. Nash. Rewriting queries using views with access patterns under integrity constraints. Theor. Comput. Sci., 371(3):200--226, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. O. M. Duschka and A. Y. Levy. Recursive plans for information gathering. In IJCAI, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. D. Florescu, A. Levy, and D. Suciu. Query containment for conjunctive queries with regular expressions. In PODS, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. A. Y. Halevy. Answering queries using views: A survey. VLDB Journal, 10:270--294, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. B. He, M. Patel, Z. Zhang, and K. C.-C. Chang. Accessing the deep Web: A survey. Communications of the ACM, 50(2):94--101, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. D. S. Johnson. A catalog of complexity classes. In Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science. MIT Press, 1990. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. C. Li. Computing complete answers to queries in the presence of limited access patterns. VLDB J., 12(3):211--227, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. C. Li and E. Y. Chang. Answering queries with useful bindings. ACM Trans. Database Syst., 26(3):313--343, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. C. Li and E. Y. Chang. On answering queries in the presence of limited access patterns. In ICDT, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. G. Miklau and D. Suciu. A formal analysis of information disclosure in data exchange. JCSS, 73(3):507--534, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. A. Nash and B. Ludascher. Processing first-order queries under limited access patterns. In PODS, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. A. Nash and B. Ludascher. Processing union of conjunctive queries with negation under limited access patterns. In EDBT, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. N. Preda, G. Kasneci, F. M. Suchanek, T. Neumann, W. Yuan, and G. Weikum. Active knowledge: dynamically enriching RDF knowledge bases by Web services. In SIGMOD, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. A. Rajaraman, Y. Sagiv, and J. D. Ullman. Answering queries using templates with binding patterns. In PODS, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Y. Sagiv and M. Yannakakis. Equivalences among relational expressions with the union and difference operators. J. ACM, 27(4):633--655, 1980. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. J. D. Ullman. Principles of Database and Knowledge-Base Systems, volume 2. Computer Science Press, 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Determining relevance of accesses at runtime

      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 '11: Proceedings of the thirtieth ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART symposium on Principles of database systems
        June 2011
        332 pages
        ISBN:9781450306607
        DOI:10.1145/1989284

        Copyright © 2011 ACM

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 13 June 2011

        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!