View
225
Download
1
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Outline
Informal Design Guidelines for Relational Databases– Semantics of the Relation Attributes– Redundant Information in Tuples and Update Anomalies– Null Values in Tuples– Spurious Tuples
Functional Dependencies (FDs)– Definition of FD – Inference Rules for FDs– Equivalence of Sets of FDs– Minimal Sets of FDs
Slide 7 -2
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Informal Design Guidelines for
Relational Databases (1)
What is relational database design?
The grouping of attributes to form "good" relation schemas
Two levels of relation schemas– The logical "user view" level
– The storage "base relation" level
Design is concerned mainly with base relations What are the criteria for "good" base relations?
Slide 7 -3
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Informal Design Guidelines for Relational Databases (2)
We first discuss informal guidelines for good relational design
Then we discuss formal concepts of functional dependencies and normal forms- 1NF (First Normal Form)- 2NF (Second Normal Form)- 3NF (Third Normal Form)- BCNF (Boyce-Codd Normal Form)
Additional types of dependencies, further normal forms, relational design algorithms by synthesis are discussed in Chapter 16
Slide 7 -4
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Semantics of the Relation
Attributes GUIDELINE 1: Informally, each tuple in a relation
should represent one entity or relationship instance. (Applies to individual relations and their attributes).
Attributes of different entities (EMPLOYEEs, DEPARTMENTs, PROJECTs) should not be mixed in the same relation
Only foreign keys should be used to refer to other entities Entity and relationship attributes should be kept apart as much as
possible.
Bottom Line: Design a schema that can be explained easily relation by relation. The semantics of attributes should be easy to interpret.
Slide 7 -5
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
A simplified COMPANY relational database schema
Slide 7 -6
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Redundant Information in Tuples
and Update Anomalies Mixing attributes of multiple entities may cause
problems– Information is stored redundantly wasting storage
– Data inconsistency
Problems with update anomalies– Insertion anomalies– Deletion anomalies– Modification anomalies
Slide 7 -7
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition Slide 7 -8
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
EXAMPLE OF AN UPDATE
ANOMALY (1) Consider the relation:EMP_PROJ ( Emp#, Proj#, Ename, Pname, No_hours)
Update Anomaly: Changing the name of project
number P1 from “Billing” to “Customer-Accounting” may cause this update to be made for all 100 employees working on project P1.
Slide 7 -9
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
EXAMPLE OF AN UPDATE ANOMALY (2)
Insert Anomaly: Cannot insert a project unless an employee is assigned to .
Inversely - Cannot insert an employee unless an he/she is assigned to a project.
Delete Anomaly: When a project is deleted, it will result in deleting all the employees who work on that project. Alternately, if an employee is the sole employee on a project, deleting that employee would result in deleting the corresponding project.
Slide 7 -10
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition Slide 7 -11
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition Slide 7 -12
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Guideline to Redundant Information in Tuples and Update Anomalies
GUIDELINE 2: Design a schema that does not suffer from the insertion, deletion and update anomalies. If there are any present, then note them so that applications can be made to take them into account
Slide 7 -13
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Null Values in Tuples
GUIDELINE 3: Relations should be designed such that their tuples will have as few NULL values as possible
Attributes that are NULL frequently could be placed in separate relations (with the primary key)
Reasons for nulls:– attribute not applicable or invalid– attribute value unknown (may exist)– value known to exist, but unavailable
Slide 7 -14
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Spurious Tuples
Bad designs for a relational database may result in erroneous results for certain JOIN operations
The "lossless join" property is used to guarantee meaningful results for join operations
GUIDELINE 4: The relations should be designed to satisfy the lossless join condition. No spurious tuples should be generated by doing a natural-join of any relations. Avoid relations that contain matching attributes that are not (foreign key, primary key) combinations because joining on such attributes may produce spurious tuples
Slide 7 -15
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition Slide 7 -16
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition Slide 7 -17
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition Slide 7 -18
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Spurious Tuples (2)
There are two important possleroperties of decompositions:
(a) non-additive or lssness of the corresponding join
(b) preservation of the functional dependencies.
Note that property (a) is extremely important and cannot be sacrificed. Property (b) is less stringent and may be sacrificed. (See more in chapter 16 [1]).
Slide 7 -19
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Functional Dependencies (FDs)
Definition of FDDirect, indirect, partial dependenciesInference Rules for FDsEquivalence of Sets of FDsMinimal Sets of FDs
Slide 7 -20
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Functional Dependencies (1)
Functional dependencies (FDs) are used to specify formal measures of the "goodness" of relational designs
FDs and keys are used to define normal forms for relations
FDs are constraints that are derived from the meaning and interrelationships of the data attributes
A set of attributes X functionally determines a set of attributes Y if the value of X determines a unique value for Y
Slide 7 -21
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Functional Dependencies (2)
X -> Y holds if whenever two tuples have the same value for X, they must have the same value for Y
For any two tuples t1 and t2 in any relation instance r(R): If t1[X]=t2[X], then t1[Y]=t2[Y]
X -> Y in R specifies a constraint on all relation instances r(R)Written as X -> Y; can be displayed graphically on a relation
schema as in Figures. ( denoted by the arrow).
FDs are derived from the real-world constraints on the attributes
Slide 7 -22
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Examples of FD constraints (1)
social security number determines employee nameSSN -> ENAME
project number determines project name and locationPNUMBER -> {PNAME, PLOCATION}
employee ssn and project number determines the hours per week that the employee works on the project{SSN, PNUMBER} -> HOURS
Slide 7 -23
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Examples of FD constraints (2)
An FD is a property of the attributes in the schema RThe constraint must hold on every relation instance
r(R)If K is a key of R, then K functionally determines all
attributes in R (since we never have two distinct tuples with t1[K]=t2[K])
Slide 7 -24
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Functional Dependencies (3)
Direct dependency (fully functional dependency): All attributes in a R must be fully functionally dependent on the primary key (or the PK is a determinant of all attributes in R)
TicketID TicketName
TicketType
TicketLocation
Slide 7 -25
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Functional Dependencies (4)
Indirect dependency (transitive dependency): Value of an attribute is not determined directly by the primary key
TicketID TicketName
TicketType
TicketLocation
Price
Slide 7 -26
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Partial dependency– Composite determinant - more than one value is
required to determine the value of another attribute, the combination of values is called a composite determinantEMP_PROJ(SSN, PNUMBER, HOURS, ENAME, PNAME,
PLOCATION){SSN, PNUMBER} -> HOURS
– Partial dependency - if the value of an attribute does not depend on an entire composite determinant, but only part of it, the relationship is known as the partial dependency
SSN -> ENAME PNUMBER -> {PNAME, PLOCATION}
Functional Dependencies (5)
Slide 7 -27
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Functional Dependencies (6)
Partial dependency
TicketID TicketName
TicketType
TicketLocation
Price
Agent-id AgentName
AgentLocation
Slide 7 -28
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Inference Rules for FDs (1)
An FD X → Y is inferred from a set of dependencies F specified on R if whenever r satisfies all the dependencies in F, X → Y also holds in r
F |=X → Y to denote that the functional dependency X→Y is inferred from the set of functional dependencies F
Exp: U = {ABC}, F = {AB, BC},
We can say F A⊨ C
Slide 7 -29
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Inference Rules for FDs (1)
Armstrong's inference rules:IR1. (Reflexive) If Y subset-of X, then X -> YIR2. (Augmentation) If X -> Y, then XZ -> YZ
(Notation: XZ stands for X U Z)IR3. (Transitive) If X -> Y and Y -> Z, then X -> Z
Lemma 1: IR1, IR2, IR3 form a sound and complete set of
inference rules
Slide 7 -30
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Inference Rules for FDs (2)
Lemma 2: Some additional inference rules that are useful:
(Decomposition) If X -> YZ, then X -> Y and X -> Z(Union) If X -> Y and X -> Z, then X -> YZ
(Psuedotransitivity) If X -> Y and WY -> Z, then WX -> Z
The last three inference rules, as well as any other inference rules, can be deduced from IR1, IR2, and IR3 (completeness property)
Slide 7 -31
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Sample Exercises
F = {AB, BC} – AC is inferred from F? (transitive)
F = {ABC} – AB , AC are inferred from F?
Ans: ABC và BCB (reflexive)
=> AB (transitive)F = {AB, BC}, ABC ?F = {AB}, ACB?
A AC ACA & AB
ACB is right
Slide 7 -32
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Inference Rules for FDs (3)
Closure of a set F of FDs is the set F+ of all FDs (include F) that can be inferred from F
Closure of a set of attributes X with respect to F is the set X + of all attributes that are functionally determined by X
X + can be calculated by repeatedly applying IR1, IR2, IR3 using the FDs in F
Slide 7 -33
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Determining X+
Example: Emp_Proj(Ssn, Ename,Pnumber, Pname, Plocation, Hours)
Slide 7 -34
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Sample Exercises
R(ABCDEG) and FDs as follows:F = {AB→C, C →A, BC →D,
ACD→B, D→EG, BE→C,
CG→BD, CE→AG}X = {BD}, calculate X+
Result:X+ = R
Slide 7 -35
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Inference Rules for FDs (3)
Lemma 3:X Y is inferred from F based on Armstrong’s
rules if and only if Y is a subset of X+ with respect to F
F Arm (X ⊢ Y) Y XF+Note:
– We can check whether X is a key of R by calculating X+. If X+ = R then X is a key
Slide 7 -36
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Checking if an FD Holds on FUsing the Closure
Let R(ABCDEFGH) satisfy the following functional dependencies: {A->B, CH->A, B->E, BD->C, EG->H, DE->F}
Which of the following FD is also guaranteed to be satisfied by R?
1. BFG AE
2. ACG DH
3. CEG AB
Hint: Compute the closure of the LHS of each FD that you get as a choice. If the RHS of the candidate FD is contained in the closure, then the candidate follows from the given FDs, otherwise not.
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Checking for Keys Using the Closure
Which of the following could be a key for R(A,B,C,D,E,F,G) with functional dependencies {ABC, CDE, EFG, FGE, DEC, and BCA}
1. BDF
2. ACDF
3. ABDFG
4. BDFG
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Algorithm for Finding a Key
Note: the algorithm determines only one key out of the possible candidate keys for R;
Slide 7 -39
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Finding Keys using FDs
Tricks for finding the key:If an attribute never appears on the RHS of any FD, it
must be part of the keyIf an attribute never appears on the LHS of any FD, but
appears on the RHS of any FD, it must not be part of any key
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Finding Keys using FDs
We have:UL and UR are the set of LHS and RHS attributes
N = U – UR is the set of independent attributes and those which only appear on LHS N must be a part of keys
If N+ = R, then N is a minimal key Stop here!Otherwise:D = UR – UL is the set of attributes which only appears in
RHS D cannot be a part of keyL = U – (N D) is the set of attributes which may or may
not be a part of keysFor each combination X in L, we calculate {N X}+. If
{N X}+ = R so it is a keySlide 7 -41
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Finding Keys using FDs
Consider R = {A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H} with a set of FDs
F = {CD→A, EC→H, GHB→AB, C→D, EG→A, H→B, BE→CD, EC→B}
Find all the candidate keys of R
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Finding Keys using FDs
F = {CD→A, EC→H, GHB→AB, C→D, EG→A, H→B, BE→CD, EC→B}
UR = {AHBDC} = {ABCDH}N = U – UR = {EFG} but EFG+ = EFGA ≠ RUL = {CDEGHB} = {BCDEGH}D = UR – UL = {A}L = U – (N D) = {BCDH}We have combinations such as {B, C, D, H, BC, BD,
BH, CD, CH, DH, BCD, BCH, CDH, BCDH}
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Finding Keys using FDs
For each combination X, calculate {X N}+BEFG+ = ABCDEFGH = R; it’s a key [BE→CD,
EG→A, EC→H] CEFG+ = ABCDEFGH = R; it’s a key [EG→A,
EC→H, H→B, BE→CD] DEFG+ = ADEFG ≠ R; it’s not a key [EG→A] EFGH+ = ABCDEFGH = R; it’s a key [EG→A,
H→B, BE→CD] If we add any further attribute(s), they will form the
superkey. Therefore, we can stop here searching for candidate key(s).
So, candidate keys are: {BEFG, CEFG, EFGH}
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Exercises
Consider R = {A, B, C, D, E, F} with a set of FDs
F = {A BC, BD, AD E, CDA}
Find all the candidate keys of R
Consider R = {A, B, C, D, E, F, G} with a set of FDs
F = {ABC→DE, AB→D, DE→ABCF, E→C}
Find all the candidate keys of R
Slide 7 -45
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Equivalence of Sets of FDs
Two sets of FDs F and G are equivalent if:- every FD in F can be inferred from G, and- every FD in G can be inferred from F
Hence, F and G are equivalent if F + =G +
Definition: F covers G if every FD in G can be inferred from F (i.e., if G + subset-of F +)
F and G are equivalent if F covers G and G covers FThere is an algorithm for checking equivalence of
sets of FDsHome Ex:
Slide 7 -46
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Minimal Sets of FDs (1) A minimal cover of a set of functional dependencies E
is a minimal set of dependencies (in the standard canonical form and without redundancy) that is equivalent to E.
A set of FDs is minimal if it satisfies the following conditions:
(1) Every dependency in F has a single attribute for its RHS
(2) We cannot remove any dependency from F and have a set of dependencies that is equivalent to F.
(3) We cannot replace any dependency X -> A in F with a dependency Y -> A, where Y is a subset-of X and still have a set of dependencies that is equivalent to F. (X A also is called a complete functional dependency)
Slide 7 -47
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Minimal Sets of FDs (2)
Every set of FDs has an equivalent minimal setThere can be several equivalent minimal setsThere is no simple algorithm for computing a
minimal set of FDs that is equivalent to a set F of FDs
To synthesize a set of relations, we assume that we start with a set of dependencies that is a minimal set
Slide 7 -48
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Finding a Minimal Cover F for a Set of Functional Dependencies E
Slide 7 -49
Copyright © 2004 Ramez Elmasri and Shamkant NavatheElmasri/Navathe, Fundamentals of Database Systems, Fourth Edition
Finding a Minimal Cover F for a Set of Functional Dependencies E
Let the given set of FDs be E :{B→A, D→A, AB→D}. Please find the minimal cover of E.
Step 1: Set F = EStep 2: All FDs in the canonical formStep 3: Determine if AB D has any redundant attribute on
LHS
– Since B A, we have BB AB (IR2) => B AB (However, AB D), so we have B D
– So replace AB D by B D. We have E’ = {B A, D A, B D)
Step 4: We also derive from E’ B A is redundant
Slide 7 -50
Recommended