ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Maintenance of data cubes and summary tables in a warehouse
Full text PdfPdf (1.58 MB)
Source ACM SIGMOD Record archive
Volume 26 ,  Issue 2  (June 1997) table of contents
Pages: 100 - 111  
Year of Publication: 1997
ISSN:0163-5808
Also published in ...
Authors
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 9,   Downloads (12 Months): 139,   Citation Count: 60
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues   peer to peer  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
Save this Article to a Binder    Display Formats: BibTex  EndNote ACM Ref   
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/253262.253277
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Data warehouses contain large amounts of information, often collected from a variety of independent sources. Decision-support functions in a warehouse, such as on-line analytical processing (OLAP), involve hundreds of complex aggregate queries over large volumes of data. It is not feasible to compute these queries by scanning the data sets each time. Warehouse applications therefore build a large number of summary tables, or materialized aggregate views, to help them increase the system performance. As changes, most notably new transactional data, are collected at the data sources, all summary tables at the warehouse that depend upon this data need to be updated. Usually, source changes are loaded into the warehouse at regular intervals, usually once a day, in a batch window, and the warehouse is made unavailable for querying while it is updated. Since the number of summary tables that need to be maintained is often large, a critical issue for data warehousing is how to maintain the summary tables efficiently. In this paper we propose a method of maintaining aggregate views (the summary-delta table method), and use it to solve two problems in maintaining summary tables in a warehouse: (1) how to efficiently maintain a summary table while minimizing the batch window needed for maintenance, and (2) how to maintain a large set of summary tables defined over the same base tables. While several papers have addressed the issues relating to choosing and materializing a set of summary tables, this is the first paper to address maintaining summary tables efficiently.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
AAD+96
 
AL80
M. Adiba and {3. Lindsay. Database snapshots. In Proceedings of the sixth International Conference on Very Large Databases, pages 86-91, Montreal, Canada, October 1980.
BC79
BLT86
CGL+96
 
CS94
CS95
 
CW91
 
DGN95
 
GBLP96
 
GHQ95
A. Gupta, V. Harinarayan, and D. Quass. Generalized projections: A powerful approach to aggregation. In Dayal et al. {DGN95}.
 
GJM96
GL95
GMS93
Han87
HRU96
HZ96
 
JM96
H. Jagadish and I. Mumick, editors. Proceedings of A CM SIGMOD I996 International Conference on Management of Data, Montreal, Canada, June 1996.
JMS95
LMSS95
 
MS93
 
QGMW96
 
Qua96
D. Quass. Maintenance expressions for views with aggregation. Presented at the Workshop on Materialized Views, June 1996.
 
Qua97
 
QW91
 
RK86
 
SAG96
S. Sarawagi, R. Agrawal, and A. Gupta. On computing the data cube. Research report rj 10026, IBM Almaden Research Center, San Jose. California, 1996.
SI84
 
SP89
 
TMB96
 
YL95
ZGHW95

CITED BY  60
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Collaborative Colleagues:
Inderpal Singh Mumick: colleagues
Dallan Quass: colleagues
Barinderpal Singh Mumick: colleagues

Peer to Peer - Readers of this Article have also read: