This application is related to application Ser. No. 11/161,908, entitled “XML Sub-Document Versioning Method in XML Databases Using Record Storages,” filed Aug. 22, 2005, and application Ser. No. 11/209,598, entitled “Scalable Storage Schemes for Native XML Column Data of Relational Tables,” filed Aug. 22, 2005, both of which are assigned to the assignee of the present application.
The present invention relates to hierarchically structured data, and more particularly to the storage of hierarchically structured data in a database.
As hierarchically structured data, such as eXtensible Mark-up Language (XML), become widely used as a data format, it also becomes a native data type for database systems. The storage of hierarchically structured data in relational databases, however, poses particular challenges.
One conventional approach is to store XML as text. This approach preserves the original documents and retrieves the entire document. However, it is inefficient in supporting queries and document updates, especially when the document is large.
Another conventional approach is to decompose and store the XML as tables in the relational database. This requires either a special relational schema for each XML schema or a generic relational representation for the XML data model. However, the result data is relatively large, and the queries are usually slow to execute.
Another conventional approach uses an object data model to store XML tree data, where many direct references or pointers are stored in the records for the parent-child relationships. However, this approach lacks scalability, has a larger data volume due to the references, and is less flexible in the re-organization of records.
Another conventional approach decomposes the XML data at a high level into relational data. However, this approach is inefficient in that it places lower levels and long text into a Character Large Object (CLOB), or it stores the original textual XML redundantly along with the object model.
Accordingly, there exists a need for an improved method and system for storing hierarchically structured data in record data structures. The improved method and system should combine the advantages of relational scalability and flexibility for the re-organization of records and the object efficiency for traversal and update. The present invention addresses such a need.
An improved method and system for storing hierarchically structured data in record data structures uses logical node identifiers to reference the nodes of a hierarchically structured data stored within and across relational data structures, such as records or pages of records. A node identifier index is used to map each logical node identifier to a record identifier for the record that contains the node. When a sub-tree is stored in a separate record, a proxy node is used to represent the sub-tree in the parent record. The mapping in the node identifier index reflects the storage of the sub-tree nodes in the separate record. This storage scheme supports document order clustering and sub-document update with the record as the unit. Since the references between the records are through logical node identifiers, there is no limitation to the moving of records across pages, as long as the indices are updated or rebuilt to maintain synchronization with the resulting data pages. The method and system in accordance with the present invention thus is significantly more scalable than conventional approaches. It has a much smaller storage consumption than conventional object approaches that uses explicit references between nodes.
The present invention provides an improved method and system for storing hierarchically structured data in record data structures. The following description is presented to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to make and use the invention and is provided in the context of a patent application and its requirements. Various modifications to the preferred embodiment will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art and the generic principles herein may be applied to other embodiments. Thus, the present invention is not intended to be limited to the embodiment shown but is to be accorded the widest scope consistent with the principles and features described herein.
The method and system in accordance with the present invention uses logical node identifiers to reference the nodes of a hierarchically structured data stored within and across relational data structures, such as records or pages of records. A node identifier index is then used to map each logical node identifier to a record identifier for the record that contains the node. When a sub-tree is stored in a separate record, a proxy node is used to represent the sub-tree in the parent record. The mapping in the node identifier index is then updated to reflect the storage of the sub-tree nodes in the separate record. In this manner, when re-organization of records are desired or needed, only the node identifier index needs to be updated. The logical node identifiers in the records need not be changed.
To more particularly describe the features of the present invention, please refer to
If the node is a new node, then it is determined if there is enough space in the wbuf for the new node, via step 205. If not, then the largest sub-tree (or a sequence of sub-trees) of the parent node is stored into one record, via step 207. The taken-out sub-tree (or a sequence of sub-trees) is replaced with a proxy node until there is enough space for the new node. If there is enough space, then the relationship between the node and a current node is determined, via step 208. If the node is the child node of the current node, then the parent node pointer is pushed onto the parent stack, via step 209. If the node is a sibling node of the current node, then step 209 is skipped. Next, the node is put into the wbuf at the location pointed to by the working pointer, the parent's child count is incremented, and the working pointer is advanced, via step 210. If the node is an end of a set of child nodes, then the parent node pointer is popped from the parent stack, via step 206.
Eventually, there is no more node information, via step 203. At that time, the nodes stored in the wbuf is stored into one or more records, via step 211.
Returning to
In this embodiment, the storage of the tree 101 into records is based on a preorder traversal process, known in the art. However, other types of traversal processes can be used. With the preorder traversal processing, as the nodes are constructed, a grouping logic keeps track of the sub-tree being constructed for the length of the sub-tree rooted at the current node. For example, assume that the maximum record size, R, is known. A working buffer of 2×R or more in size is used in the construction. If the entire tree is smaller than R, then the entire tree is stored into one record. Otherwise, the tree is split into multiple records. The storage of a tree in multiple records is described further below.
For example, referring to both
Referring now to
A hierarchically structured data tree is stored within a single record whenever possible. Occasionally, multiple records are required to store the hierarchically structured data tree. When more than one record is required, the method in accordance with the present invention stores sub-trees in a separate record, and represents this sub-tree in the parent record with a “proxy node”, which itself does not contain a logical node ID. Assume for example, that the tree 101 in
Assuming again that the maximum record size, R, is known, as the nodes are constructed node by node in the preorder traversal process, if the entire tree is larger than R, then the tree is split into multiple records. The largest sub-tree is searched and copied into a separate record. The copied sub-tree is replaced with a proxy node, and the length of the nodes in the separate record is excluded from the calculation of the sub-tree length. Only the length of the proxy node is included. All the length information is updated accordingly.
In order to find the sub-tree nodes represented by a proxy node, a node identifier (node ID) index is created. This index is to map a node ID to the RID of a record that contain the node with the given node ID. All the node IDs in document order can be viewed as points in a line. The records break this line into a plurality of intervals. The node ID index contains the upper end point of each interval.
For example, referring to
Thus, to locate Node 4 with logical node ID ‘020204’, for example, a search of the node identifier index finds the three entries 801-803. The identifier ‘020204’ is greater than ‘02’ of entry 801, but less than ‘020206’ of entry 802. Node 4 is thus mapped to the RID (rid1) for the sub-tree record 602. If Node 8 with logical node ID ‘020602’ is to be located, ‘020602’ is greater than ‘020206’ of entry 802 and equal to ‘020602’ of entry 803. Node 8 is thus mapped to the RID (rid2) for the parent record 601.
By using proxy nodes to reference sub-tree nodes stored outside of a parent record, the storage of hierarchically structured data is significantly more scalable than conventional methods. This is especially true since the nodes of the tree are stored as a few records, and the nodes of sub-trees can be moved together more efficiently. When nodes are updated, the records may require reorganization once it is discovered that not all nodes of the tree can be stored in one record. Upon this discovery, a sub-tree that can be stored in a separate record is identified. The nodes of the sub-tree are then replaced with the proxy node. If the records are less clustered, reorganization can be performed to make records in document order again. Because references between records are accomplished through logical node ID's rather than explicit references, this reorganization is significantly more easily accomplished, allowing greater scalability.
Here, a sub-tree starts at a current node and ends at the current node start position plus the sub-tree length. A tree can be traversed using two primitives: getFirstChild and getNextSibling. The primitive ‘getFirstChild’ starts from the current node, and if the number of children is ‘0’, then ‘not found’ is returned. Otherwise, the next node is the first child. The primitive ‘getNextSibling’ starts from the current node, and if it is the root node, then ‘not found’ is returned. Otherwise, the total sub-tree length rooted at the current node is added to the start position of the node to get the next node position. If it is beyond the sub-tree rooted at the parent node, then ‘not found’ is returned. Otherwise, that next node is the next sibling.
If a proxy node is encountered, the search key for the node ID index is set to ‘(DocID, node ID)’. The index will return the RID of the record that contains the node. This record is then fetched and the traversal continues. To find a node with a given node ID, a node with the local node ID at each level is found using the above two primitives.
To further improve efficiency, a proxy node, called a range proxy node, can represent a sequence of sub-trees contained in a record, and multiple proxy nodes next to each other within a record can be collapsed into a single “range proxy node”. For example, as illustrated in
An improved method and system for storing hierarchically structured data in relational data structures are disclosed. The method and system uses logical node identifiers to reference the nodes of a hierarchically structured data stored within and across relational data structures, such as records or pages of records. A node identifier index is used to map each logical node ID to a RID for the record that contains the node. When a sub-tree is stored in a separate record, a proxy node is used to represent the sub-tree in the parent record. The mapping in the node identifier index is then updated to reflect the storage of the sub-tree nodes in the separate record. This storage scheme supports the following:
Clustering. To support document order clustering, the DocID and node ID for the sub-tree root are used. To improve the efficiency of the clustering, the DocID and the minimum node ID of the nodes, which is also the absolute node ID of the sub-tree root, can be put into separate fields within the record of nodes.
Update. A sub-document update can be performed with the record as the unit. Insert, delete, or replace of a sub-tree can be performed easily.
Re-organization of records. Since the references between the records are through logical node ID's, then there is no limitation to the moving of records across pages, as long as the indices are updated or rebuilt to maintain synchronization with the resulting data pages.
Partitioning. Even a document can be partitioned based on node ID ranges.
The method and system in accordance with the present invention thus is significantly more scalable than conventional approaches. It has a much smaller storage consumption than conventional object approaches that uses explicit references between nodes. They can also leverage existing indexing approaches and reuse some of its utilities.
Although the present invention has been described in accordance with the embodiments shown, one of ordinary skill in the art will readily recognize that there could be variations to the embodiments and those variations would be within the spirit and scope of the present invention. Accordingly, many modifications may be made by one of ordinary skill in the art without departing from the spirit and scope of the appended claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4794528 | Hirose et al. | Dec 1988 | A |
5151697 | Bunton | Sep 1992 | A |
5608904 | Chaudhuri et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5706498 | Fujimiya et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5883589 | Takishima et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
6058397 | Barrus et al. | May 2000 | A |
6085188 | Bachmann et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6263332 | Nasr et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6295526 | Kreiner et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6313766 | Langendorf et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6353820 | Edwards et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6381605 | Kothuri et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6437799 | Shinomi | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6510434 | Anderson et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6539369 | Brown | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6539396 | Bowman-Amuah | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6563441 | Gold | May 2003 | B1 |
6587057 | Scheuermann | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6610104 | Lin et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6647391 | Smith et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6810414 | Brittain | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6889226 | O'Neil et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6985898 | Ripley et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
7072904 | Najork et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7080065 | Kothuri et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
7133865 | Pedersen et al. | Nov 2006 | B1 |
7246138 | McCauley et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7274671 | Hu | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7293005 | Fontoura et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7293028 | Cha et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7333982 | Bakalash et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7716253 | Netz et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
20020099715 | Jahnke et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020120679 | Hayton et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020145545 | Brown | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030014397 | Chau et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030023528 | Wilce et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030088639 | Lentini et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20040002939 | Arora et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040044959 | Shanmugasundaram et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040111672 | Bowman et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040128296 | Krishnamurthy et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040167864 | Wang et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040167915 | Sundararajan et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040205638 | Thomas et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050055336 | Hui et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050125431 | Emmick et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050192955 | Farrell | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050210052 | Aldridge | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20060004792 | Lyle et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
08190543 | Jul 1996 | JP |
2001034619 | Feb 2001 | JP |
2002269139 | Sep 2002 | JP |
2004178084 | Jun 2004 | JP |
WO0142881 | Aug 2001 | WO |
WO 0203245 | Jan 2002 | WO |
WO0203245 | Jan 2002 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Kanne, Carl Christian, et al., “Efficient Storage of XML Data,” Universitat Mannheim, Germany, Jun. 16, 1999, pp. 1-20. |
Elias, “Interval and Recency Rank Souce Coding Two On-Line Adaptive Variable Length Schemes,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, V IT-33, N1, Jan. 1987, pp. 3-10. |
Tadayon et al., “Grouping Algorithm for Lossless Data Compression,” IEEE Computer Society, Data Compression Conference, Mar. 30-Apr. 1 1998, 15pgs. |
Grust, “Accelerating XPath Location Steps,” ACM SIGMOD 2002, Jun. 4-6, 2002, Madison, WI, pp. 109-120. |
Bremer et al., “An Efficient XML Node Identification and Indexing Scheme,” Technical Report CSE-2003-04, Dept. of Computer Science, University of California at Davis, 2003, 14pgs. |
Bruno et al., “Holistic Twig Joins: Optimal XML Pattern Matching,” ACM SIGMOD 2002, Jun. 4-6, 2002, Madison, WI, pp. 310-321. |
Li et al., “Indexing and Querying XML Data for Regular Path Expressions,” Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on VLDB, Sep. 11-14, 2001, Rome, Italy, pp. 361-370. |
Cohen et al., “Labeling Dynamic XML Trees,” Proceedings of the 21st ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, Jun. 4-6, 2002, Madison, WI, pp. 271-281. |
Jagadish et al., “On Effective Multi-Dimensional Indexing for Strings,” ACM SIGMOD 2000, May 14-19, 2000, Dallas, TX, pp. 403-414. |
“Technique for Performing Generalized Prefix Matches,” IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, V40, N3, Mar. 1997, pp. 189-200. |
Wang et al. ,“ViST: A Dynamic Index Method for Querying XML Data by Tree Structures,” ACM SIGMOD 2003, Jun. 9-12, 2003, San Diego, CA, pp. 110-121. |
Guo et al., “XRANK: Ranked Keyword Search over XML Documents,” ACM SIGMOD 2003, Jun. 9-12, 2003, San Diego, CA, pp. 16-27. |
Garofalakis et al., “XTRACT: A System for Extracting Document Type Descriptors from XML Documents,” ACM SIGMOD 2000, Dallas, TX, V29, N2, pp. 165-176. |
Kanne, Carl-Christian et al., “Efficient Storage of XML Data,” Universität Mannheim, Germany, Jun. 16, 1999, pp. 1-20. |
Zhang, Guogen (Gene), “XML Data Model Storage,” IBM Confidential, Mar. 17, 2004, pp. 1-10. |
Zhang, Guogen (Gene), “XML Data Model Storage Advanced Features,” IBM Confidential, Apr. 25, 2004, pp. 1-4. |
Glance, Natalie S. et al., “Generalized Process Structure Grammars (GPSG) for Flexible Representations of Work,” Proceedings of the 1996 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 180-189. |
Thorsten Fiebig, et al., Anatomy of a native XML base management system, VLDB Journal, Springer Verlag, Berlin, DE, vol. 11, 2002, pp. 292-314. |
Thorsten Fiebig, et al., Anatomy of a Native XML Base Management System, URL:http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/fiebig02anatomy.html, pp. 1-52, Dec. 2002. |
Sihem Amer-Yahia, et al., Logical and Physical Support for Heterogeneous Data, Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. CIKM 2002 ACM New York, NY, Nov. 4-9, 2002, pp. 270-281. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20070043743 A1 | Feb 2007 | US |