Relational database system

• US 4,918,593 A
• Filed: 01/08/1987
• Issued: 04/17/1990
• Est. Priority Date: 01/08/1987
• Status: Expired due to Term

• Current Assignee: Intel Corporation
• Original Assignee: Wang Laboratories Incorporated
• Inventors: Huber, Val J.
• Primary Examiner(s): Shaw, Gareth D.
• Assistant Examiner(s): Ray, Gopal C.
• Application Number:
  US07/001,474
• Time in Patent Office: 1,195 Days
• Field of Search: 364/200, 364/300, 364/900 MS File
• US Class Current: 1/1
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 16/2365 Ensuring data consistency and integrity
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 16/284 Relational databases

Abstract

Apparatus used in a relational data base system to maintain a dependence between a user-defined field in a row of one base table and the state of a set of rows in another base table. There are three kinds of dependent fields: a count field which contains a count of the rows in the set, a sum field which is the sum of a field in the rows of the set, and a base copy down field, which is a field in the rows of the set which contains a copy of a value in a field in the row of the one base table. The two base tables make up a referenced-referencing pair and the row from the one table has a primary key which is used as a foreign key in the set of rows of the other base table. The apparatus consists of components in the data dictionary which define the user-defined dependent field and the nature of the dependence, including any conditions thereon, and components in the data base system'"'"'s run time system for maintaining the dependence. Each time the state of a row in the referencing base table is altered, the run time system uses the data dictionary to determine whether there is a user-defined dependent field, and if there is, what kind of dependent field it is. Code in the run time system then reestablishes the dependence as required for the altered row.

Claims

1. In a relational data base system including data dictionary means, a first base table and a second base table, each of which has at least one user-defined row defined in the data dictionary in such fashion that the first base table and the second base table are referenced and referencing, and operational means responsive to data base operation commands and to the data dictionary for performing operations on the rows,

means for maintaining a dependence between a first user-defined field in a row in one of the base tables and a row in the other of the base tables comprising:

dependence defining means in the data dictionary for defining the dependence; and

means in the operational means responsive to the dependence defining means for reestablishing the dependence as defined in the dependence defining means whenever a data base operation alters the row.

2. In the dependence-maintaining means of claim 1 and wherein:

the dependence defining means further includes condition defining means for defining a condition to which the dependence is subject; and

the dependence reestablishing means is further responsive to the condition defining means and reestablishes the dependence as determined by the condition.

3. In the dependence-defining means of claim 2 and wherein:

the condition defining means includes

executable condition code for testing whether the condition exists and result indicating means for indicating the result of an execution of the condition code and

the dependence reestablishing means responds to the condition defining means by executing the condition code before altering the row, determining a first result from the result indicating means, altering the row, again executing the condition code, determining a second result from the result indicating means, comparing the first and second results, and reestablishing the dependence when the comparison indicates that the alteration of the row affected the condition.

4. In the dependence-maintaining means of claim 1 and wherein:

the one base table is referenced by the other base table;

the dependence-defining means defines the user-defined field as containing an aggregate value representing a characteristic of certain rows in the other base table; and

the dependence reestablishing means recomputes the aggregate value whenever a data base operation changes the characteristic.

5. In the dependence-maintaining means of claim 4 and wherein:

only the dependence-reestablishing means changes the value of the user-defined field.

6. In the dependence-maintaining means of claim 4 and wherein:

the dependence defining means further includes condition defining means for defining a condition to which the dependence is subject; and

the dependence reestablishing means is further responsive to the condition defining means and recomputes the aggregate value as determined by the condition.

7. In the dependence-defining means of claim 6 and wherein:

the condition defining means includes

executable condition code for testing whether the condition exists and result indicating means for indicating the result of an execution of the condition code and

the dependence reestablishing means responds to the condition defining means by executing the condition code before altering the row, determining a first result from the result indicating means, altering the row, again executing the condition code, determining a second result from the result indicating means, comparing the first and second results and recomputing the aggregate value when the comparison indicates that the alteration of the row affected the condition.

8. In the dependence-maintaining means of claim 7 and wherein:

the aggregate value is a count of the certain rows; and

the dependence reestablishing means recomputes the count by incrementing or decrementing the count as indicated by the comparison.

9. In the dependence-maintaining means of claim 7 and wherein:

the aggregate value is a sum of the values of a second user-defined field in each of the certain rows; and

the dependence reestablishing means recomputes the sum by adding the difference between the value of the second user-defined field before the alteration and the value of the second user-defined field after the alteration to the aggregate value.

10. In the dependence-maintaining means of claim 6 and wherein:

the value of the condition is dependent on the value of a second user-defined field in the rows of the other data base.

11. In the dependence-maintaining means of claim 6 and wherein:

the value of the condition is dependent on a value defined by the relational data base system.

12. In the dependence-maintaining means of claim 4 and wherein:

the aggregate value is a count of the certain rows; and

the dependence reestablishing means recomputes the count whenever a data base operation changes the number of the certain rows.

13. In the dependence-maintaining means of claim 4 and wherein:

the aggregate value is a sum of the values of a second user-defined field in each of the certain rows; and

the dependence reestablishing means recomputes the sum whenever a data base operation changes the value of the second user-defined field in any of the certain rows.

14. In the dependence-maintaining means of claim 1 and wherein:

the one base table is referenced by the other base table;

the dependence defining means defines a copydown field in each row of the other base table as containing a copy of the current value of the user-defined field; and

the dependence reestablishing means copies the current value of the user-defined field into the copydown fields of the rows whenever a data base operation changes the value of the user-defined field.

15. In the dependence-maintaining means of claim 14 and wherein:

only the dependence-reestablishing means changes the value of the copydown field.