Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Nested transactions in a logical language for active rules

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logic in Databases (LID 1996)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 1154))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We present a hierarchically structured transaction-oriented concept for a rule-based active database system. In [LL94, LHL95], we have proposed Statelog as a unified framework for active and deductive rules. Following the need for better structuring capabilities, we introduce procedures as a means to group semantically related rules and to encapsulate their behavior. In addition to executing elementary updates, procedures can be called, thereby defining (sub)transactions which may perform complex computations. A Statelog procedure is a set of ECA-style Datalog rules together with an import/export interface. Systemimmanent frame and procedure rules ensure both propagation of facts and processing of results of committed subtransactions. Thus, Statelog programs specify a nested transaction model which allows a much more structured and natural modeling of complex transactions than previous approaches. Two equivalent semantics for a Statelog program P are given: (i) a logic programming style semantics by a compilation into a logic program, and (ii) a model-theoretic Kripke-style semantics. While (ii) serves as a conceptual model of active rule behavior and allows to reason about properties of the specified transactions, (i) — together with the appropriate execution model — yields an operational semantics and can be used as an implementation of P.

Supported by grant no. GRK 184/1-96 of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. S. Abiteboul. Updates, a new frontier. In ICDT, Springer LNCS 326, pp. 1–18, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  2. M. Abadi and Z. Manna. Temporal logic programming. Journal of Symbolic Comp., 8(3), 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  3. S. Abiteboul and V. Vianu. Datalog extensions for database queries and updates. JCSS, 43, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  4. A. Aiken, J. Widom, and J. M. Hellerstein. Behavior of database production rules: Termination, confluence, and observable determinism. In SIGMOD, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  5. A. Aiken, J. Widom, and J. M. Hellerstein. Static analysis techniques for predicting the behavior of active database rules. TODS, 20(1):3–41, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  6. M. Baudinet. On the expressiveness of temporal logic programming. Information and Computation, 117(2), 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  7. E. Baralis, S. Ceri, and S. Paraboschi. Run-time detection of non-terminating active rule systems. In Ling et al. [LMV95].

    Google Scholar 

  8. A. J. Bonner and M. Kifer. Transaction logic programming. In D. S. Warren, editor, ICLP. MIT Press, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  9. A. J. Bonner and M. Kifer. An overview of transaction logic. Theoretical Comp. Sci., 133, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  10. A. Brogi, P. Mancarella, D. Pedreschi, and F. Turini. Modular logic programming. ACM TOPLAS, 16(4):1361–1398, July 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  11. A. Brogi and F. Turini. Semantics of meta-logic in an algebra of programs. In LICS, pp. 262–270, Paris, France, July 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  12. W. Chen. Programming with logical queries, bulk updates and hypothetical reasoning. In B. Thalheim, ed., Proc. of the Workshop Semantics in Databases, Prague, 1995. TU Cottbus.

    Google Scholar 

  13. J. Chomicki. Polynomial time query processing in temporal deductive databases. PODS, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  14. J. Chomicki and T. Imieliński. Finite representation of infinite query answers. TODS 18(2), 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  15. U. Dayal, B. Blaustein, A. Buchmann, U. Chakravarthy, M. Hsu, R. Ledin, D. McCarthy, A. Rosenthal, S. Sarin, M. J. Carey, M. Livny, and R. Jauhari. The HiPAC project: Combining Active Databases and Timing Constraints. In SIGMOD, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  16. U. Dayal, A. Buchmann, and S. Chakravarthy. The HiPAC Project. In J. Widom and S. Ceri, editors, Active Database Systems: Triggers and Rules for Advanced Database Processing, Morgan Kaufmann, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  17. K. R. Dittrich, S. Gatziu, and A. Geppert. The active database management system manifesto: A rulebase of adbms features. In Sellis [Sel95].

    Google Scholar 

  18. U. Dayal, E. Hanson, and J. Widom. Active database systems. In W. Kim, ed., Modern Database Systems: The Object Model, Interoperability, and Beyond, Ch. 21. ACM Press, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  19. P. Fraternali and L. Tanca. A structured approach for the definition of the semantics of active databases. TODS, 1996. to appear.

    Google Scholar 

  20. S. Ghandeharizadeh, R. Hull, D. Jacobs et al. On implementing a language for specifying active database execution models. In VLDB, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  21. S. Ghandeharizadeh, R. Hull, and D. Jacobs. Heraclitus: Elevating deltas to be first-class citizens in a database programming language. TODS, 1996. To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  22. U. Hamann. Ein System zur Beschreibung und Ausführung von Änderungsoperationen in einer zustandsorientierten Erweiterung von Datalog. Master's thesis, Institut für Informatik, Universität Freiburg, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  23. M. Kramer, G. Lausen, and G. Saake. Updates in a rule-based language for objects. VLDB, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  24. A. P. Karadimce and S. D. Urban. Refined triggering graphs: A logic-based approach to termination analysis in an active object-oriented database. In 12th ICDE, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  25. B. Ludäscher, U. Hamann, and G. Lausen. A logical framework for active rules. In Proc. 7th Intl. Conf. on Management of Data (COMAD), Pune, 1995. Tata McGraw-Hill, ftp://ftp.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/documents/reports/report78/report78.ps.gz.

    Google Scholar 

  26. G. Lausen and B. Ludäscher. Updates by reasoning about states. In 2nd Intl. East-West Database Workshop, Workshops in Computing, Klagenfurt, Austria, 1994. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  27. B. Ludäscher, W. May, and G. Lausen. Nested Transactions in a Logical Language for Active Rules. Technical Report 80, Institut für Informatik, Universität Freiburg, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  28. T. W. Ling, A. O. Mendelzon, and L. Vieille, editors. DOOD, Springer LNCS 1013, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  29. G. Lausen and G. Saake. A possible world semantics for updates by versioning. In Proc. of 4th Workshop on Modelling Database Dynamics, Volkse, 1993. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  30. D. Montesi, E. Bertino, and M. Martelli. Transactions and updates in deductive databases. Technical Report 2, Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Informazione, Università di Milano, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  31. S. Manchanda and D. S. Warren. A logic-based language for database updates. In J. Minker, ed., Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, pp. 363–394. 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  32. I. Motakis and C. Zaniolo. Composite temporal events in active database rules: A logic-oriented approach. In 4th DOOD, LNCS 1013, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  33. N. W. Paton, J. Campin, A. A. A. Fernandes, and M. H. Williams. Formal specification of active database functionality: A survey. In Sellis [Sel95].

    Google Scholar 

  34. T. C. Przymusinski. On the declarative semantics of deductive databases and logic programs. In J. Minker, ed., Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, pp. 191–216. Morgan Kaufmann, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  35. T. K. Sellis, editor. Proc. of the 2nd Intl. Workshop on Rules in Database Systems (RIDS), Athens, Greece, 1995, Springer LNCS 985.

    Google Scholar 

  36. E. Simon and J. Kiernan. The a-rdl system. In Widom and Ceri [WC96], Chapter 5.

    Google Scholar 

  37. A. Van Gelder. The alternating fixpoint of logic programs with negation. In PODS, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  38. A. Van Gelder, K. Ross, and J. Schlipf. The well-founded semantics for general logic programs. JACM, 38(3):620–650, July 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  39. J. Widom and S. Ceri, editors. Active Database Systems: Triggers and Rules for Advanced Database Processing. Morgan Kaufmann, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  40. J. Widom. Active databases. In M. Stonebraker, ed. Readings in Database Systems, 2nd edition. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994. Introduction to Chapter 4.

    Google Scholar 

  41. C. Zaniolo. A unified semantics for active and deductive databases. Proc. of the 1st Intl. Workshop on Rules in Database Systems (RIDS), Edinburgh, 1993. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  42. C. Zaniolo. Active database rules with transaction conscious stable model semantics. In Ling et al. [LMV95].

    Google Scholar 

  43. C. Zaniolo, N. Arni, and K. Ong. Negation and Aggregates in Recursive Rules: the \(\mathcal{L}\mathcal{D}\mathcal{L}\) ++ Approach. In S. Ceri, K. Tanaka, and S. Tsur, eds., DOOD, Springer LNCS 760, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  44. C. Zaniolo and R. Sadri. A simple model for active rules and their behavior in deductive databases. Proc. 2nd ICLP Workshop on Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, Santa Margherita Ligure, Italy, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Informatik, Universität Freiburg, Am Flughafen 17, 79110, Freiburg, Germany

    Bertram Ludäscher, Wolfgang May & Georg Lausen

Authors
  1. Bertram Ludäscher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wolfgang May
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Georg Lausen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Dino Pedreschi Carlo Zaniolo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1996 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Ludäscher, B., May, W., Lausen, G. (1996). Nested transactions in a logical language for active rules. In: Pedreschi, D., Zaniolo, C. (eds) Logic in Databases. LID 1996. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1154. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0031742

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0031742

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-61814-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-70683-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation