Integrity constraint checking in stratified databases

Incremental Integrity Checking: Limitations and Possibilities

“…Several approaches to simplification do not comply with this requirement [16,11,18,4,6,19,10]; [19] showed that his II method was more efficient than [11,18] and we gave evidence of great improvements obtained with Simp wrt II. Methods that as ours, are based on pre-tests are, e.g., [17,9].…”

“…Our simplified theory (∅) is clearly a great improvement over these results, since it executes in virtually no time and guarantees, without further checking, that this transaction pattern cannot affect integrity. This example was also used in [10], where the authors, unfortunately, only compared their method to [11], but not to [19]. However, our transactional simplification is clearly unbeatable.…”

“…We first consider the tests presented in [19] where the method of the so-called inconsistency indicators (II) was shown to run more efficiently than previous methods, namely [18,11] and naive constraint checking (i.e., with no simplification). We show that, on their examples, we obtain better performance (indeed, ideal simplifications).…”

“…Main approaches to efficient integrity checking that have been proposed since the early eighties include extensions of the SLD(NF) proof procedure [18,6], partial evaluation [10], update propagation [11], incremental view maintenance [7] and several others. The way we pursue here is the so-called simplification of ICs -a principle that has been recognized for more than two decades, dating back to at least [16], and then elaborated by several other authors, e.g., [11,17,4,6,20,5]. Our work is an attempt to reconcile and generalize such ideas in a systematic way that may promote applications of deductive databases for use with current database management technology.…”

Towards intelligent databases

“…[17,18,1,2,4,7,55,57,60,61,67,13]), and how integrity constraints are checked when the database is updated (see e.g. [17,18,15,25,39,43,47,49,53,19]). …”