implementing mapping composition - university of california,.pptVIP

Implementing Mapping Composition Todd J. Green* University of Pennsylania with Philip A. Bernstein (Microsoft Research), Sergey Melnik (Microsoft Research), Alan Nash (UC San Diego) VLDB 2006 Seoul, Korea *Work partially supported by NSF grants IIS0513778 and IIS0415810 Schema mappings Mapping: a correspondence between instances of different schemas Applications of mappings Schema evolution Applications of mappings Data integration, data exchange Requirements for constraints “First attribute in R is a key for R” ?2,4(R ?1=3 R) μ ?2,2(R) “View V equals R joined with S” V μ R ? S, V ? R ? S “Second attribute of R is a foreign key in S” ?2(R) μ ?1(S) ?2,4(S ?1=3 S) μ ?2,2(S) Data integration, data exchange – GLAV R ? S μ T ? U Mapping composition Composition is hard Hard part: write composition in the same language as the input mappings. Depending on language: Not always possible Not even decidable whether possible Strategy 1: use powerful (second-order) mapping language closed under composition [FKPT04] Not supported by DBMS today Expensive to check Source-target restriction Strategy 2: settle for partial solutions [NBM05] Containment mappings ? easier integration with DBMS The strategy we adopt in this work Our contributions New algorithm for composition problem Incorporates view unfolding and left-composition (new technique) Makes best effort in failure cases Algebraic rather than logic-based mappings Use of monotonicity to handle more operators Modular and extensible factoring of algorithm First implementation of composition Experimental evaluation Formal definition of composition Mapping: set of pairs of instances of db schemas The composition m12 ± m23 is the mapping {hA,Ci : (9B)(hA,Bi 2 m12 and hB,Ci 2 m23)} where A,B,C are instances of S1,S2,S3 Composition problem: find constraints in same language as input mappings giving the composition of the input mappings Example: Best-effort composition problem Composition not always possible “Best-