Advances in Database Technology P11
lượt xem 3
download
Advances in Database Technology P11
Tham khảo tài liệu 'advances in database technology p11', công nghệ thông tin, cơ sở dữ liệu phục vụ nhu cầu học tập, nghiên cứu và làm việc hiệu quả
Bình luận(0) Đăng nhập để gửi bình luận!
Nội dung Text: Advances in Database Technology P11
 482 M. Marx Remark 1. XPath 1.0 (and hence Core XPath) has a strange asymmetry between the vertical (parent and child) and the horizontal (sibling) axis relations. For the vertical direction, both transitive and reflexive–transitive closure of the basic steps are primi tives. For the horizontal direction, only the transitive closure of the immediate_left_ and immediate_right_sibling axis are primitives (with the rather ambiguous names following and preceding_sibling). removes this asymmetry and has all four one step naviga tional axes as primitives. XPath 1.0 also has two primitive axis related to the document order and transitive closures of one step navigational axes. These are just syntactic sugar, as witnessed by the following definitions: So we can conclude that is at least as expressive as Core XPath, and has a more elegant set of primitives. The reader might wonder why the set of XPath axes was not closed under taking con verses. The next theorem states that this is not needed. Theorem 2. The set of axes of all four XPath languages are closed under taking con verses. 4 Expressive Power This section describes the relations between the four defined XPath dialects and two XPath dialects from the literature. We also embed the XPath dialects into first order and monadic second order logic of trees and give a precise characterization of the conditional path dialect in terms of first order logic. Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 XPath with Conditional Axis Relations 483 Core XPath [17] was introduced in the previous section. [4] considers the Core XPath fragment obtained by deleting the sibling relations and the booleans on the filter expressions. Theorem 3. 1. is strictly contained in Core XPath, and Core XPath is strictly contained in 2. is strictly contained in 3. is strictly contained in 4. and are equally expressive. We now view the XPath dialects as query languages over trees, and compare them to first and second order logic interpreted on trees. Before we can start, we must make clear what kind of queries XPath expresses. In the literature on XPath it is often tacitly assumed that each expression is always evaluated at the root. Then the meaning of an expression is naturally viewed as a set of nodes. Stated differently, it is a query with one variable in the select clause. This tacit as sumption can be made explicit by the notion of an absolute XPath expression /locpath. The answer set of /locpath evaluated on a tree (notation: is the set The relation between filter expressions and arbitrary XPath expressions evaluated at the root becomes clear by the follow ing equivalence. For each filter expression fexpr, is true if and only if On the other hand, looking at Table 1 it is immediate that in general an expression denotes a binary relation. Let and be the first order and monadic second order languages in the signature with two binary relation symbols Descendant and Sibling and countably many unary predicates P, Q, . . . B oth languages are interpreted on node labeled sibling ordered trees in the obvious manner: Descendant is interpreted as the descendant relation Sibling as the strict total order on the siblings, and the unary predicates P as the sets of nodes labeled with P. For the second order formulas, we always assume that all second order variables are quantified. So a formula in two free variables means a formula in two free variables ranging over nodes. It is not hard to see that every expression is equivalent4 to an formula in two free variables, and that every filter expression is equivalent to a formula in one free variable. can express truly second order properties as shown in Example 2. A little bit harder is Proposition 1. Every (filter) expression is equivalent to an formula in two (one) free variable(s). The converse of this proposition would state that is powerful enough to express every first order expressible query. For one variable queries on Dedekind complete linear structures, the converse is known as Kamp’s Theorem [21]. Kamp’s result is generalized to other linear structures and given a simple proof in the seminal paper [14]. [24] showed that the result can further be generalized to sibling ordered trees: Theorem 4 ([24]). Every query in one free variable is expressible as an absolute expression. 4 In fact, there is a straightforward logspace translation, see the proof of Theorem 7.(i). Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 484 M. Marx Digression: Is first order expressivity enough? [5] argues for the noncounting property of natural languages. A counting property expresses that a path consists of a number of nodes that is a multiple of a given number Since first order definable properties of trees are noncounting [32], by Theorem 4, has the noncounting property. Example 2 shows that with regular expressions one can express counting properties. DTD’s also allow one to express these: e.g., expresses that A nodes have a number of B children divisible by 3. It seems to us that for the node addressing language first order expressivity is suf ficient. This granted, Theorem 4 means that one need not look for other (i.e., more expressive) XPath fragments than Whether this also holds for constraints is de batable. Fact is that many natural counting constraints can be equivalently expressed with first order constraints. Take for example, the DTD rule which describes the couple element as a sequence of man, woman pairs. Clearly this expresses a counting property, but the same constraint can be expressed by the following (i.e., first order) inclusions on sets of nodes. Both left and right hand side of the inclusions are filter expressions. (In these rules we just write man instead of the cumbersome self :: man, and similarly for the other node labels.) In the next two sections on the complexity of query evaluation and containment we will continue discussing more powerful languages than partly because there is no difference in complexity, and partly because DTD’s are expressible in them. 5 Query Evaluation The last two sections are about the computational complexity of two key problems related to XPath: query evaluation and query containment. We briefly discuss the complexity classes used in this paper. For more thorough surveys of the related theory see [20, 27]. By PTIME and EXPTIME we denote the wellknown complexity classes of problems solvable in deterministic polynomial and deterministic exponential time, respectively, on Turing machines. queries can be evaluated in linear time in the size of the data and the query. This is the same bound as for Core XPath. This bound is optimal because the combined complexity of Core XPath is already PTIME hard [16]. It is not hard to see that the linear time algorithm for Core XPath in [15] can be extended to work for full But the result also follows from known results about Propositional Dynamic Logic model checking [3] by the translation given in Theorem 10. For a model a node and an XPath expression Theorem 5. For expressions can be computed in time Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 XPath with Conditional Axis Relations 485 6 Query Containment under Constraints We discuss equivalence and containment of XPath expressions in the presence of con straints on the document trees. Constraints can take the form of a Document Type Defi nition (DTD) [37], an XSchema [40] specification, and in general can be any statement. For XPath expressions containing the child and descendant axes and union of paths, this problem —given a DTD— is already EXPTIMEcomplete [26]. The containment prob lem has been studied in [36,9,25,26]. For example, consider the XPath expressions in abbreviated syntax5 and Then obviously implies But the converse does not hold, as there are trees with nodes having just a single child. Of course there are many situations in which the “counterexamples” to the converse containment disappear, and in which and are equivalent. For instance when (a) every node has a child. This is the case when the DTD contains for instance the rule or in general on trees satisfying (b) if every node has a sibling. This holds in all trees in which (c) if no has a child. This holds in all trees satisfying We consider the following decision problem: for XPath expressions, does it follow that given that and and The example above gives four instances of this problem: This first instance does not hold, all others do. A number of instructive observations can be drawn from these examples. First, the constraints are all expressed as equivalences between XPath expressions denoting sets of nodes, while the conclusion relates two sets of pairs of nodes. This seems general: constraints on trees are naturally expressed on nodes, not on edges6. A DTD is a prime example. From the constraints on sets of nodes we deduce equivalences about sets of pairs of nodes. In example (a) this is immediate by substitution of equivalents. In example (b), some simple algebraic manipulation is needed, for instance using the validity That constraints on trees are naturally given in terms of nodes is fortunate because we can reason about sets of nodes instead of sets of edges. The last becomes (on arbitrary graphs) quickly undecidable. The desire for computationally well behaved languages for reasoning on graphs resulted in the development of several languages which can specify sets of nodes of trees or graphs like Propositional Dynamic Logic [19], Computation Tree Logic [11] and the prepositional [22]. Such languages are –like XPath– 5 In our syntax they are and 6 This does not mean that we cannot express general properties of trees. For instance, expresses that the tree has depth at most two, and that the tree is at most binary branching. Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 486 M. Marx typically twosorted, having a sort for the relations between nodes and a sort for sets of nodes. Concerns about computational complexity together with realistic modeling needs determine which operations are allowed on which sort. For instance, boolean intersection is useful on the set sort (and available in XPath 1.0) but not in the relational sort. Similarly, complementation on the set sort is still manageable computationally but leads to high complexity when allowed on the relation sort. All these propositional languages contain a construct with from the edge sort and from the set sort. denotes the set of nodes from which there exists a path to a node. Full boolean operators can be applied to these constructs. Note that XPath contains exactly the same construct: the location path evaluated as a filter expression. Thus we consider the constraint inference problem restricted to XPath expressions denoting sets of nodes, earlier called filter expressions, after their use as filters of node sets in XPath. This restriction is natural, computationally still feasible and places us in an established research tradition. We distinguish three notions of equivalence. The first two are the same as in [4]. The third is new. Two expressions and are equivalent if for every tree model They are root equivalent if the answer sets of and are the same, when evaluated at the root7. The difference between these two notions is easily seen by the following example. The expressions and are equivalent when evaluated at the root (both denote the empty set) but nowhere else. If are both filter expressions and self we call them filter equivalent. Equivalence of and is denoted by letting context decide which notion of equivalence is meant. Root and filter equivalence are closely related notions: Theorem 6. Root equivalence can effectively be reduced to filter equivalence and vice verse. The statement expresses that is logically implied by the set of constraints This is this case if for each model in which holds for all between 1 and also holds. The following results follow easily from the literature. Theorem 7. expressions. The problem whether is decidable. (ii) Let be filter expressions in which child is the only axis. The problem whether is EXPTIME hard. Decidability for the problem in (i) is obtained by an interpretation into whence the complexity is nonelementary [30]. On the other hand, (ii) shows that a single exponential complexity is virtually unavoidable: it already obtains for filter expressions with the most popular axis. Above we argued that a restriction to filter expressions is a good idea when looking for “low” complexity, and this still yields a very useful fragment. And indeed we have Theorem 8. Let be root or filter expressions. The problem whether is in EXPTIME. 7 Thus, if for every tree model Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 XPath with Conditional Axis Relations 487 6.1 Expressing DTDs in In this section we show how a DTD can effectively be transformed into a set of constraints on filter expressions. The DTD and this set are equivalent in the sense that a tree model conforms to the DTD if and only if each filter expression is true at every node. A regular expression is a formula generated by the following grammar: with an element name. A DTD rule is a statement of the form with an element name and a regular expression. A DTD consists of a set of such rules and a rule stating the label of the root. An example of a DTD rule is husband; kid*. A document conforms to this rule if each family node has a wife, a husband and zero or more kid nodes as children, in that order. But that is equivalent to saying that for this document, the following equivalence holds: where first and last abbreviate not and not denoting the first and the last child, respectively. This example yields the idea for an effective reduction. Note that instead of husband[fexpr] we could have used a conditional For ease of translation, we assume without loss of generality that each DTD rule is of the form for an element name. Replace each element name in by and call the result Now a DTD rule is 8 transformed into the equivalent filter expression constraint : That this transformation is correct is most easily seen by thinking of the finite state automaton (FSA) corresponding to The word to be recognized is the sequence of children of an node in order. The expression in the right hand side of (1) processes this sequence just like an FSA would. We assumed that every node has at least one child, the first being labeled by The transition from the initial state corresponds to making the step to the first child The output state of the FSA is encoded by last, indicating the last child. Now describes the transition in the FSA from the first node after the input state to the output state. The expression encodes an transition in the FSA. If a DTD specifies that the root is labeled by this corresponds to the constraint (Here and elsewhere root is an abbreviation for So we have shown the following Theorem 9. Let be DTD and the set of expressions obtained by the above transformation. Then for each tree T in which each node has a single label it holds that T conforms to the DTD This yields together with Theorem 8, Corollary 1. Both root equivalence and filter equivalence of expressions given a DTD can be decided in EXPTIME. 8 The symbol denotes set inclusion. Inclusion of node sets is definable as follows: iff Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 488 M. Marx 7 Conclusions We can conclude that can be seen as a stable fixed point in the development of XPath languages. is expressively complete for first order properties on node labeled sibling ordered trees. The extra expressive power comes at no (theoretical) extra cost: query evaluation is in linear and query equivalence given a DTD in exponential time. These results even hold for the much stronger language Having a stable fixed point means that new research directions come easily. We mention a few. An important question is whether is also complete with respect to first order definable paths (i.e., first order formulas in two free variables.) Another expressivity question concerns XPath with regular expressions and tests, our language Is there a natural extension of first order logic for which is complete? An empirical question related to first and second order expressivity —see the discussion at the end of Section 4— is whether second order expressivity is really needed, both for XPath and for constraint languages like DTD and XSchema. Finally we would like to have a normal form theorem for and In particular it would be useful to have an effective algorithm transforming expressions into directed step expressions (cf. the proof of Theorem 8.) References 1. S. Abiteboul, P. Buneman, and D. Suciu. Data on the web. Morgan Kaufman, 2000. 2. N. Alechina, S. Demri, and M. de Rijke. A modal perspective on path constraints. Journal of Logic and Computation, 13:1–18, 2003. 3. N. Alechina and N. Immerman. Reachability logic: An efficient fragment of transitive closure logic. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 8(3):325–337, 2000. 4. M. Benedikt, W. Fan, and G. Kuper. Structural properties of XPath fragments. In Proc. ICDT’03, 2003. 5. R. Berwick and A. Weinberg. The Grammatical Basis of Natural Languages. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1984. 6. P. Blackburn, B. Gaiffe, and M. Marx. Variable free reasoning on finite trees. In Proceedings of Mathematics of Language (MOL–8), Bloomington, 2003. 7. D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, and M. Lenzerini. Representing and reasoning on XML documents: A description logic approach. J. of Logic and Computation, 9(3):295–318, 1999. 8. E.M. Clarke and B.H. Schlingloff. Model checking. Elsevier Science Publishers, to appear. 9. A. Deutsch and V. Tannen. Containment of regular path expressions under integrity constraints. In Knowledge Representation Meets Databases, 2001. 10. J. Doner. Tree acceptors and some of their applications. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 4:405–451, 1970. 11. E.M. Clarke and E.A. Emerson. Design and Synthesis of Synchronization Skeletons using Branching Time Temporal Logic. In D. Kozen, editor, Proceedings of the Workshop on Logics of Programs, volume 131 of LNCS, pages 52–71, Springer, 1981. 12. M. Fisher and R. Ladner. Propositional dynamic logic of regular programs. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 18(2):194–211, 1979. 13. D.M. Gabbay, I. Hodkinson, and M. Reynolds. Temporal Logic. Oxford Science Publications, 1994. Volume 1: Mathematical Foundations and Computational Aspects. 14. D.M. Gabbay, A. Pnueli, S. Shelah, and J. Stavi. On the temporal analysis of fairness. In Proc. 7th ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 163–173, 1980. Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 XPath with Conditional Axis Relations 489 15. G. Gottlob, C. Koch, and R. Pichler. Efficient algorithms for processing XPath queries. In Proc. of the 28th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB 2002), 2002. 16. G. Gottlob, C. Koch, and R. Pichler. The complexity of XPath query evaluation. In PODS 2003, pages 179–190, 2003. 17. G. Gottlob and C. Koch. Monadic queries over treestructured data. In Proc. LICS, Copen hagen, 2002. 18. D. Harel. Dynamic logic. In D.M. Gabbay and F. Guenther, editors, Handbook of Philosoph ical Logic, volume 2, pages 497–604. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1984. 19. D. Harel, D. Kozen, and J. Tiuryn. Dynamic Logic. MIT Press, 2000. 20. D. Johnson. A catalog of complexity classes. In J. van Leeuwen, editor, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, volume B, pages 67–161. Elsevier, 1990. 21. J.A.W. Kamp. Tense Logic and the Theory of Linear Order. PhD thesis, University of California, Los Angeles, 1968. 22. D. Kozen. Results on the propositional mucalculus. Th. Comp. Science, 27, 1983. 23. D. Kozen. Kleene algebra with tests. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 19(3):427–443, May 1997. 24. M. Marx. the expressively complete XPath fragment. Manuscript, July 2003. 25. G. Miklau and D. Suciu. Containment and equivalence for an XPath fragment. In Proc. PODS’02, pages 65–76, 2002. 26. F. Neven and T. Schwentick. XPath containment in the presence of disjunction, DTDs, and variables. In ICDT 2003, 2003. 27. Ch. Papadimitriou. Computational Complexity. Addison–Wesley, 1994. 28. V. Pratt. Models of program logics. In Proceedings FoCS, pages 115–122, 1979. 29. M. Rabin. Decidability of second order theories and automata on infinite trees. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 141:1–35, 1969. 30. K. Reinhardt. The complexity of translating logic to finite automata. In E. Grädel et al., editor, Automata, Logics, and Infinite Games, volume 2500 of LNCS, pages 231–238. 2002. 31. J. Rogers. A descriptive approach to language theoretic complexity. CSLI Press, 1998. 32. W. Thomas. Logical aspects in the study of tree languages. In B. Courcelle, editor, Ninth Colloquium on Trees in Algebra and Programming, pages 31–50. CUP, 1984. 33. M.Y. Vardi and P. Wolper. Automatatheoretic techniques for modal logics of programs. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 32:183–221, 1986. 34. P. Wadler. Two semantics for XPath. Technical report, Bell Labs, 2000. 35. M. Weyer. Decidability of S1S and S2S. In E. Grädel et al., editor, Automata, Logics, and Infinite Games, volume 2500 of LNCS, pages 207–230. Springer, 2002. 36. P. Wood. On the equivalence of XML patterns. In Proc. 1st Int. Conf. on Computational Logic, volume 1861 of LNCS, pages 1152–1166, 2000. 37. W3C. Extensible markup language (XML) 1.0 http://www.w3.org/TR/RECxml. 38. W3C. XML path language (XPath 1.0). http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath.html. 39. W3C. XML path language (XPpath 2.0) http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath20/. 40. W3C. XML schema part 1: Structures. http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema1. 41. W3C. Xquery 1.0: A query language for XML. http://www. w3. org/TR//xquery/. 42. W3C. XSL transformations language XSLT 2.0. http://www. w3. org/TR/xslt20/. A Appendix A.1 XPath and Prepositional Dynamic Logic The next theorem states that PDL and the filter expressions are equally expressive and effectively reducible to each other. Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 490 M. Marx For our translation it is easier to use a variant of standard PDL in which the state formulas are boolean formulas over formulas for a program. Now has the same meaning as in standard PDL. Clearly this variant is equally expressive as PDL by the equivalences and Theorem 10. There are logspace translations from filter expressions to PDLformulas and in the converse direction such that for all models for all nodes in PROOF OF THEOREM Io. Let from filter expressions to PDL formulas be defined as follows: Then (2) holds. For the other direction, let commute with the booleans and let self where is with each occurrence of ? replaced by ?self Then (3) holds. A.2 Proofs PROOF OF THEOREM 2. Every axis containing converses can be rewritten into one without con verses by pushing them in with the following equivalences: PROOF OF THEOREM 3. is a fragment of Core XPath, but does not have negation on pred icates. That explains the first strict inclusion. The definition of given here was explicitly designed to make the connection with Core XPath immediate. does not have the Core XPath axes following and preceding as primitives, but they are definable as explained in Remark 1. All other Core XPath axes are clearly in The inclusion is strict because Core XPath does not contain the immediate right and left sibling axis. holds already on linear structures. This follows from a fundamental result in temporal logic stating that on such structures the temporal operator until is not expressible by the operators nexttime, sometimeinthefuture and their inverses [13]. The last two correspond to the XPath axis child and descendant, respectively. Until(A,B) is expressible with conditional paths as also holds on linear structures already. is a fragment of the first order logic of ordered trees by Proposition 1. But Example 2 expresses a relation which is not first order expressible on trees [32]. because the conditional axis can be expressed by ? and ;. For the other direction, let be an axis. Apply to all subterms of the following rewrite rules until no Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 XPath with Conditional Axis Relations 491 more is applicable9. From the axioms of Kleene algebras with tests [23] it follows that all rules state an equivalence. Then all tests occurring under the scope of a or in a sequence will be conditional to an atomic axes. Now consider a location step axes::ntst[fexpr]. If axes is a expression or a sequence, the location step is in If it is a union or a test, delete tests by the equivalences PROOF OF PROPOSITION I. The only interesting cases are transitive closures of conditional paths, like This expression translates to the formula (letting (·)° denote the trans lation) ; PROOF OF THEOREM 5. Computing the set of states in a model at which a PDL formula is true can be done in time [3]. Thus for filter expressions, the result follows from Theorem 10. Now let be an arbitrary expression, and we want to compute Expand with a new label such that Use the technique in the proof of Theorem 6 to obtain a filter expression such that iff (here use the new label instead of root.) PROOF OF THEOREM 6. We use the fact that axis are closed under converse (Theo rem 2) and that every location path is equivalent to a simple location path of the form The last holds as is equiv alent to etc. We claim that for each model if and only if and This is easily proved by writing out the definitions using the equivalence Fil ter equivalence can be reduced to root equivalence because iff PROOF OF THEOREM 7. (i) Decidability follows from an interpretation in the monadic second order logic over variably branching trees of [31]. The consequence problem for is shown to be decidable by an interpretation into Finiteness of a tree can be expressed in The translation of expressions into is straightforward given the meaning definition. We only have to use second order quantification to define the transitive closure of a relation. This can be done by the usual definition: for R any binary relation, holds iff (ii) Theorem 10 gives an effective reduction from PDL tree formulas to filter expressions. The consequence problem for ordinary PDL interpreted on graphs is EXPTIME hard [12]. An inspection 9 An exponential blowup cannot be avoided. Consider a composition of expressions for the atomic axis. Then the only way of rewriting this into an axes is to fully distribute the unions over the compositions, leaving a union consisting of elements. Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 492 M. Marx of the proof shows that the path can be used as the only program and that checking consequence on finite trees is sufficient. PROOF OF THEOREM 8. We first give a proof for by a reduction to deterministic PDL with converse. Then we give a direct algorithm which might be easier to implement. This algorithm unfortunately works only for expressions in which there are no occurrences of an arrow and its inverse under the Kleene star. Proof by reduction. By Theorem 10, and standard PDL reasoning we need only decide satisfi ability of PDL formulas in the signature with the four arrow programs interpreted on finite trees. Call the language compassPDL. Consider the language the PDL language with only the two programs and their inverses is interpreted on finite at most binary branching trees, with and interpreted by the first and second daughter relation, respectively. We will effectively reduce compassPDL satisfiability to satisfiability. is a fragment of deterministic PDL with converse. [33] shows that the satisfiability problem for this latter lan guage is decidable in EXPTIME over the class of all models. This is done by constructing for each formula a tree automaton which accepts exactly all tree models in which is satisfied. Thus deciding satisfiability of reduces to checking emptiness of The last check can be done in time polynomial in the size of As the size of is exponential in the length of this yields the exponential time decision procedure. But we want satisfiability on finite trees. This is easy to cope with in an automatatheoretic framework: construct an automaton which accepts only finite binary trees, and check emptiness of The size of does not depend on so this problem is still in EXPTIME. The reduction from compassPDL to formulas is very simple: replace the compass PDL programs by the programs respectively. It is straightforward to prove that this reduction preserves satisfiability, following the reduction from to S2S as explained in [35]: a compassPDL model is turned into an model by defining and is the first daughter of } and model is turned into a compassPDL model by defining and Direct proof. Consider as in the Theorem. By Theorem 6 we may assume that all terms are filter expressions. For this proof, assume also that the expressions are in and that in each subexpression of an axis, may not contain an arrow and its inverse. We call such expressions directed. First we bring these expressions into a normal form. Define the set of step paths by the grammar where is one of the four arrows and the can be any path. The next lemma gives the reason for considering directed step paths. Its simple proof is omitted. Lemma 1. Let be a step path not containing an arrow axis and its inverse. Then in any model holds only if and the relation is conversely wellfounded. Lemma 2. Every expression is effectively reducible to an expression in which for every occurrence of is a step path. Proof. Define a function G from expressions to sets of expressions which yields the set of step paths which “generate” the expression: for an expression if is a step path. Otherwise set and Now define the translation from expressions to expressions in which for every occurrence of is a step path: if is a step path. Otherwise set and for A rather straightforward induction shows that and that is linear in Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 XPath with Conditional Axis Relations 493 The rest of the proof is a reduction to the consequence problem for a simple language interpreted on binary trees. The language is equivalent to filter expressions with only two axis, first and second child. We could give the proof in terms of the language, but the syntax is very cumbersome to work with. For that reason we use the effective reduction to PDL formulas from Theorem 10 and do the rest of the proof in the PDL syntax. The proof consists of two linear reductions and a decision algorithm. The first reduction removes the transitive closure operation by adding new propositional symbols. Similar techniques are employed in [29,10] for obtaining normalized monadic second order formulas. The second reduction is based on Rabin’s reduction of to S2S. Let be the modal language10 with only two atomic paths and the modal constant root. is interpreted on finite binary trees, with and interpreted by the first and second daughter relation, respectively, and root holds exactly at the root. The semantics is the same as that of PDL. The consequence problem for PDL and for is the following: for determine whether is true. The last is true if for each model with node set T in which it also holds that Lemma 3. The consequence problem is decidable in EXPTIME. Proof. A direct proof of this lemma using a bottom up version of Pratt’s [28] EXPTIME Hintikka Set elimination technique was given in [6]. As is a sublanguage of the lemma also follows from the argument given above in the proof by reduction. A PDL formula in which the programs are axis with the restriction that for every occurrence of is a step path not containing an arrow and its inverse is called a directed step PDL formula. The next Lemma together with Lemmas 2 and 3 and Theorem 10 yield the EXPTIME result for directed expressions. Lemma 4. There is an effective reduction from the consequence problem for directed step PDL formulas to the consequence problem for formulas. Proof. Let be a directed step PDL formula. Let be the Fisher–Ladner closure [12] of We associate a formula with as follows. We create for each a new propositional variable and for each we also create Now “axiomatizes” these new variables as follows: We claim that for every model which validates for every node and for every new variable In the proof we use the usual logical notation instead of the more cumbersome The proof is by induction on the structure of the formula and the path and for the left to right direction of the case by induction on the depth of direction of The case for proposition 10 That is, the syntax is defined as that of PDL, with and Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 494 M. Marx letters and the Boolean cases are immediate by the axioms in For the diamonds, we also need an induction on the structure of the paths, so let for Iff, by the axiom, Iff for some such that Iff, by induction hypothesis, for some such that Iff The cases for the conditional arrows are shown similarly. The cases for composition and union and the right to left direction of the Kleene star case follow immediately from the axioms. For the left to right direction of the Kleene star we also do an induction on the depth of the direction of This is possible by Lemma 1. As an example let the direction be Let be a leaf and let By the axiom in or The latter implies, by induction on the complexity of paths, that But that is not possible by Lemma 1 as is a leaf. Thus and by IH, whence Now let be a node with descendants, and let the claim hold for nodes with descendants. Let Then by the axiom In the first case, by IH. In the second case, by the induction on the structure of paths, As is a directed step path, there exists a child of and Whence, by the induction on the depth of the direction But then also Hence for directed step PDL formulas, we have As the language is closed under conjunction, we need only consider problems of the form and we do that from now on. Note that the only modalities occurring in are for one of the four arrows. We can further reduce the number of arrows to only when we add two modal constants root and first for the root and first elements, respectively. Let be a formula in this fragment. As before create a new variable for each (single negation of a) subformula of Create as follows: and for and for each subformula and add to the axioms We claim that for every model which validates for every node and for every sub formula iff An easy induction shows this. Consider the case of then the parent of models whence by inductive hypothesis, it models so by the axiom Conversely, if then by axiom is not the root. So the parent of exists and it models Then it models by axiom and by inductive hypothesis it models Thus Hence, Note that the formulas on the right hand side only contain the modalities and Now we come to the second reduction: to the consequence problem of binary branching trees. Let be a formula, translate it to a formula as in the proof by reduction. Note that this is a directed step PDL formula. Finally use the first reduction again to reduce the consequence problem to the consequence problem of the language with just the modalities and interpreted on binary trees. Clinching all these reductions together, we obtain the reduction stated in Lemma 4. Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 Declustering TwoDimensional Datasets over MEMSBased Storage* Hailing Yu, Divyakant Agrawal, and Amr El Abbadi Department of Computer Science University of California at Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, 93106, USA {hailing,agrawal,amr}@cs.ucsb.edu Abstract. Due to the large difference between seek time and transfer time in current disk technology, it is advantageous to perform large I/O using a single sequential access rather than multiple small random I/O accesses. However, prior optimal cost and data placement approaches for processing range queries over two dimensional datasets do not consider this property. In particular, these techniques do not consider the issue of sequential data placement when multiple I/O blocks need to be retrieved from a single device. In this paper, we reevaluate the optimal cost of range queries by declustering twodimensional datasets over multiple de vices, and prove that, in general, it is impossible to achieve the new optimal cost. This is because disks cannot facilitate twodimensional sequential access which is required by the new optimal cost. Fortunately, MEMSbased storage is being developed to reduce I/O cost. We first show that the twodimensional sequential access requirement can not be satisfied by simply modeling MEMSbased storage as conventional disks. Then we propose a new placement scheme that exploits the physical properties of MEMSbased storage to solve this problem. Our theoreti cal analysis and experimental results show that the new scheme achieves almost optimal results. 1 Introduction Multidimensional datasets have received a lot of attention due to their wide applications, such as relational databases, images, GIS, and spatial databases. Range queries are an important class of queries for multidimensional data applications. In recent years, the size of datasets has been rapidly growing, hence, fast retrieval of relevant data is the key to improve query performance. A common method of browsing geographic applications is to display a low resolution map of some area on a screen. A user may specify a rectangular bounding box over the map, and request the retrieval of the higher resolution map of the specified region. In general, the amount of data associated with different regions may be quite large, and may involve a large number of I/O transfers. Furthermore, due to advances in processor and semiconductor technologies, the gap in access cost between main memory and disk is constantly increasing. Thus, I/O cost will dominate the cost of range query. To alleviate this problem, twodimensional datasets are often uniformly * This research is supported by the NSF under grants CCR9875732, IIS0220152, and EIA 0080134. E. Bertino et al. (Eds.): EDBT 2004, LNCS 2992, pp. 495–512, 2004. © SpringerVerlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004 Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 496 H. Yu, D. Agrawal, and A. El Abbadi divided into tiles. The tiles are then declustered over multiple disks to improve query performance through parallel I/O. In [10], it is shown that strictly optimal solutions for range queries exist in only a small number of cases. Given a query that retrieves A tiles, the optimal cost is where M is the number of I/O devices. A data assignment scheme is said to be strictly optimal if it satisfies the optimal cost. Because it is impossible to find the optimal solution for the general case, several assignment schemes have been proposed [5,11,3,4,6] to achieve near optimal solutions. However, all prior research, including the optimal cost formulation itself, is based on the assumption that the retrieval of each tile takes constant time and is retrieved independently (random I/O involving both seek and transfer time). This condition does not hold when considering current disk technology. Recent trends in hard disk development favor reading large chunks of consecutive disk blocks (sequential access). Thus, the solutions for allocating twodimensional data across multiple disk devices should also account for this factor. In this paper, we reevaluate the optimal cost for current disk devices, and show that it is still impossible to achieve the new optimal cost for the general case. Even though the performance gap between main memory and disks is mitigated by a variety of techniques, it is still bounded by the access time of hard disks. The mechanical positioning system in disks limits the access time improvements to only about 7% per year. Therefore, this performance gap can only be overcome by inventing new storage technology. Due to advances in nanotechnology, MicroElectroMechanical Systems (MEMS) based storage systems are appearing on the horizon as an alternative to disks [12,1,2]. MEMS are devices that have microscopic moving parts made by using techniques similar to those used in semiconductor manufacturing. As a result, MEMS devices can be produced and manufactured at a very low cost. Preliminary studies [13] have shown that standalone MEMS based storage devices reduce I/O stall time by 4 to 74 times over disks and improve the overall application run times by 1.9X to 4.4X. MEMSbased storage devices have very different characteristics from disk devices. When compared to disk devices, head movement in MEMSbased storage devices can be achieved in both X and Y dimensions, and multiple probe tips (over thousands) can be activated concurrently to access data. In [8], Griffin et al. consider the problem of integrating MEMSbased storage into computers by modeling them as conventional disks. In [9], we proposed a new data placement scheme for relational data on MEMS based storage by taking its characteristics into account. The performance analysis showed that it is beneficial to use MEMS storage in a novel way. Range queries over two dimensional data (map or images) are another dataintensive application, thus, in this paper, we explore data placement schemes for twodimensional data over MEMSbased storage to facilitate efficient processing of range queries. In our new scheme, we tile two dimensional datasets according to the physical properties of I/O devices. In all previous work, the dataset is divided into tiles along each dimension uniformly. Through the performance study, we show that tiling the dataset based on the properties of devices can significantly improve the performance without any adverse impact on users, since users only care about query performance, and do not need to know how or where data is stored. The significant improvement in performance further demonstrates the great potential that novel storage devices, like MEMS, have for database applications. Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 Declustering TwoDimensional Datasets over MEMSBased Storage 497 The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 revisits the optimal cost of a range query on a twodimensional dataset. In Section 3, we first give a brief introduction of MEMSbased storage; then we adapt existing data placement schemes proposed for disks to MEMSbased storage. A novel scheme is proposed in Section 4. Section 5 presents the experimental results. We conclude the paper in Section 6. 2 Background In this section, we first address the problem of existing optimal cost evaluation for range queries over twodimensional data, then we derive the optimal cost for current disks. 2.1 Access Time versus Transfer Time A disk is organized as a sequence of identicallysized disk pages. In general, the I/O performance of queries is expressed in terms of the number of pages accessed, assuming that the access cost is the same for each page. Access time is composed of three elements: seek time, rotational delay, and transfer time. We refer to the sum of the seek time and rotational delay as access time. Based on this assumption, the optimal cost of a query is derived as Where A is the number of tiles intersecting the query, M is the number of disk devices, is the average access time of one page, is the average transfer time of one page (all the terms have the same meaning throughout the paper). We will refer to equation (1) as the prior optimal cost. Because each tile is retrieved by an independent random I/O, in order to improve the access cost of a query, existing data placement schemes decluster the dataset into tiles and assign neighboring tiles to different devices, thus allowing concurrent access of multiple pages. In recent years, disk external transfer rates have improved significantly from 4MB/s to over 500MB/s; and the internal transfer rate is up to 160MB/s. However, access time has only improved by a factor of 2. For a disk with 8KB page size, 160MB/s internal Fig. 1. An image picture is placed on two disk devices Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 498 H. Yu, D. Agrawal, and A. El Abbadi transfer rate, and 5ms access time, the ratio of access time over transfer time is about 100. Thus, current disk technology is heavily skewed towards sequential access instead of random access due to the high cost of access time. This principle can benefit range queries over twodimensional data, if we could place the related tiles of a query that are allocated on a single disk device sequentially. For example, Figure 1 shows an image with sixteen disk pages (or tiles). Assume that this image is placed on two disk devices. According to [10], tiles will be placed as shown in Figure 1. If tiles 1 and 3 are placed sequentially on disk device 1 and tiles 2 and 4 are placed on device 2, the access cost of query Q (given by the dashed rectangle in Figure 1) is instead of Based on this observation, we reevaluate the optimal cost of range queries for hard disks. 2.2 Optimal Cost Estimation Due to the fact that current hard disks are more efficient when accessing data sequentially, the advantage of sequential access must be considered to facilitate fast retrieval of the related tiles in a range query. Ideally, if all tiles related to a query, which are allocated to the same device, are placed sequentially, then only one access time is incurred for the query. Thus the optimal retrieval cost is given by the following formula (referred to as new optimal cost). where is the average number of blocks in a track, is the time of switching from one track to a neighboring track. The first term in the formula is the cost of one access time, because all the related tiles on one device are placed consecutively, and all initial accesses to different disks are performed concurrently. The second term is the maximal transfer time of all devices, which is derived by considering the parallelism among multiple disk devices. The third term represents the track switching time if the number of involved tiles is too large to be stored on one track. However, it is impossible to achieve the optimal cost for all queries, as shown by the following argument. In general, the twodimensional data is divided into tiles. The number of disk devices is M. Consider a query with A tiles. Without loss of generality, assume A is much smaller than (thus there is no track switching time), and A is equal to M as shown in Figure 2 (a). Based on the new optimal cost formula (2), each tile in this query is allocated to a different device. Thus, the access cost of this query is This cost is optimal. Figure 2 (b) shows query which extends query in the X dimension. The number of tiles in query is and In order to achieve the optimal cost, each device is allocated two tiles, and these two tiles need to be placed sequentially. Alternatively, we extend query in the Y dimension to generate a new query as shown in Figure 2 (c). Query accesses tiles, where also equals M. Therefore, each device needs to place two tiles (one from A and one from Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 Declustering TwoDimensional Datasets over MEMSBased Storage 499 Fig. 2. Queries in a data set Fig. 3. Tile allocation to sequential disk pages sequentially to achieve the optimal cost. However, it is impossible to achieve the optimal cost for both query and Assume tiles are on device tile intersects tiles intersect and tiles intersect In order to achieve sequential access for query tiles and need to be placed next to each other. Thus, tile can not be placed next to as shown in Figure 3. Alternatively, if is placed next to then can not be placed next to Thus, in general, it is impossible to achieve the optimal cost for all queries of a data set, given the physical characteristics of disks. 3 Adapting Disk Allocation Scheme to MEMS Storage MEMS storage devices are novel experimental systems that can be used as storage. Their twodimensional structure and inherent parallel retrieval capability hold the promise of solving the problems disks face during the retrieval of twodimensional datasets. In this section, we first briefly introduce MEMSbased storage, then show how to adapt existing disk allocation schemes to MEMSbased storage. 3.1 MEMSBased Storage MEMS are extremely small mechanical structures on the order of to which are formed by the integration of mechanical elements, actuators, electronics, and sensors. These microstructures are fabricated on the surface of silicon wafers by using photolithographic processes similar to those employed in manufacturing standard semiconductor devices. MEMSbased storage systems use MEMS for the positioning of read/write heads. Therefore, MEMSbased storage systems can be manufactured at a very low cost. Several research centers are developing real MEMSbased storage devices, such as IBM Millipede [12], HewlettPackard Laboratories ARS [2], and Carnegie Mellon University CHIPS [1]. Due to the difficulty of manufacturing efficient and reliable rotating parts in silicon, MEMSbased storage devices do not make use of rotating platters. All of the designs Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 500 H. Yu, D. Agrawal, and A. El Abbadi Fig. 4. The architecture of CMU CHIPS use a largescale MEMS array, thousands of read/write heads (called probe tips), and a recording media surface. The probe tips are mounted on microcantilevers embedded in a semiconductor wafer and arranged in a rectangular fashion. The recording media is mounted on another rectangular silicon wafer (called the media sled) that uses dif ferent techniques [12,1] for recording data. The IBM Millipede uses special polymers for storing and retrieving information [12]. The CMU CHIPS project adopts the same techniques as data recording on magnetic surfaces [1]. To access data under this model, the media sled is moved from its current position to a specific position defined by coordinates. After the “seek” is performed, the media sled moves in the Y direction while the probe tips access the data. The data can be accessed sequentially in the Y dimension. The design is shown in Figure 4 (a). The media sled is organized into rectangular regions at the lower level. Each of these rectangular regions contains M × N bits and is accessible by one tip, as shown in Figure 4 (b). Bits within a region are grouped into vertical 90bit columns called tip sectors. Each tip sector contains 8 data bytes, which is the smallest accessible unit of data in MEMSbased storage [8]. In this paper, we will use the CMU CHIPS model to motivate twodimensional data allocation techniques for MEMSbased storage. The parameters are given in Table 1. Because of heatdissipation constraints, in this model, not all tips can be activated simultaneously even though it is feasible theoretically. In the CMU CHIPS model, the maximal number of tips that can be activated concurrently is limited to 1280 (which provides the intradevice parallelism). Each rectangular region stores 2000 × 2000 bits. Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
 Declustering TwoDimensional Datasets over MEMSBased Storage 501 3.2 Adapting Disk Placement Approaches Even though MEMSbased storage has very different characteristics from disk devices, in order to simplify the process of integrating it into computing systems, some prior approaches have been proposed to map MEMSbased storage into disklike devices. Using disk terminology, a cylinder is defined as the set of all bits with identical offset within a region; i.e., a cylinder consists of all bits accessible by all tips when the sled moves only in the Y direction. Due to power and heat considerations, only a subset can be activated simultaneously. Thus cylinders are divided into tracks. A track consists of all bits within a cylinder that can be accessed by a group of concurrently active tips. Each track is composed of multiple tip sectors, which contain less data than sectors of disks. Sectors can be grouped into logical blocks. In [8], each logical block is 512 bytes and is striped across 64 tips. Therefore, by using the MEMSbased storage devices in Table 1, there are up to 20 logical blocks that can be accessed concurrently (1280 concurrent tips/64 tips = 20). Data is accessed based on its logical block number on the MEMSbased storage. After this mapping, a MEMSbased storage device can be treated as a regular disk. Thus, all prior approaches for twodimensional data allocation proposed for disk de vices can be adapted to MEMSbased storage, such as Generalized Fibonacci (GFIB) scheme [11], Golden Ratio Sequences (GRS) [4], Almost optimal access [3], and other approaches based on replication [6]. All of these approaches are based on the prior op timal cost (1) and do not factor the sequential access property of current disks. Hence, when adapting them to MEMSbased storage devices, this problem still remains un solved. For example, a twodimensional dataset with 4 × 4 tiles is shown in Figure 5 (a). Two MEMSbased storage devices are used to store the data (M = 2). The MEMS devices in this example have four probe tips each, and only two of them can be activated concurrently. Based on the prior optimal cost (1), the tiles should be distributed evenly and alternately to the two devices, as shown in Figure 5 (a). The number in a tile means that the tile is allocated to MEMS device and stands for the relative position Fig. 5. An example of placing tiles on MEMSbased storage Please purchase PDF SplitMerge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark
CÓ THỂ BẠN MUỐN DOWNLOAD

Advances in Database Technology P19
46 p  54  7

Advances in Database Technology P13
50 p  37  6

Advances in Database Technology P2
50 p  52  6

Advances in Database Technology P18
46 p  56  5

Advances in Database Technology P16
50 p  47  5

Advances in Database Technology P9
50 p  46  5

Advances in Database Technology P4
50 p  39  5

Advances in Database Technology P5
50 p  34  3

Advances in Database Technology P17
50 p  44  3

Advances in Database Technology P15
50 p  40  3

Advances in Database Technology P14
50 p  45  3

Advances in Database Technology P3
50 p  49  3

Advances in Database Technology P12
50 p  38  3

Advances in Database Technology P8
50 p  42  3

Advances in Database Technology P7
50 p  41  3

Advances in Database Technology P6
50 p  38  3

Advances in Database Technology P10
50 p  52  3