BASE DE DATOS 2 Flashcards

APRENDER

1
Q

Fundamental, Additional, Union compatibility

A

Relational Algebra Operators

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Selection, Projection, Union, Set difference, Cartesian product

A

Fundamental

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Intersection, 0-join, Natural join, Semijoin, Division

A

Additional

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Produces a horizontal subset of the operand relation

(figura que parece una o con colita arriba) F(R)={t |tÎR and F(t) is true}

A

Selection

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Produces a vertical slice of a relation
(figura que parece pi)A1,…,An
(R)={t[A1,…, An] | tÎR}

A

Projection

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Similar to set unión
R U S={t | t Î R or t Î S}

A

Union

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

General Form
R – S = {t |t Î R and t Ï S}

A

Set Difference

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

R × S = {t [A1,…,Ak1
, Ak1+1,…,Ak1+k2
] | t[A1,…,Ak1
] Î R and
t[Ak1+1,…,Ak1+k2
] Î S}

A

Cartesian (Cross) Product

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

R (la figura de interseccion que parece una: n)S = {t | t Î R and t Î S}
= R – (R – S)

A

Intersection

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

is derivate of Cartesian product. There are various forms of join. The primary classification is between inner join and outer joi

A

0-Join

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

is derivate of Cartesian product. There are various forms of join. The primary classification is between inner join and outer joi

A

0-Join

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

The above example is a special case of 0-join which is called the equi-join.

A

Equi-join

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

It is a equi-join of two relations R and S over an attribute (or attributes) common to both R and S and projecting out one copy of those attributes

A

Natural join

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Inner join requires the joined tuples from two operand relations to satisfy the join predicate. In contrast, in outer join tuples exist in the result relation regardless

A

Outer-Join

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

The tuples from the left operand relation are always in the result.

A

Left outer join

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

The tuples from the right operand relation are always in the result.

A

Right outer join.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Tuples from both relations are always in the result.

A

Full outer join

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

defined over the set of attributes A, by relation S, defined over the set of attributes B, is the subset of tuples of R that participate in the join of R with S

A

Semijoin

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

is that it decreases the number of tuples that need to be handled to form the join. It is important because it usually results in a decreased number of secondary storage access by making better use of memory.

A

The advantage of semijoin

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Specify the properties that the result should hold Tuple relational calculus
Domain relational calculus

A

Relational Calculus

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

An interconnected collection of autonomous computers that are capable of exchanging information among themselves.

A

Computer Network

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Irregular, Bus, Star, Ring, Mesh

A

Types of Networks

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Point-to-point (unicast), Broadcast (multi-point)

A

Communication Schemes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

One or more (direct or indirect) links between each pair of nodes
Communication always between two nodes
Receiver and sender are identified by their addresses included in the message header Message may follow one of many links between the sender and receiver using switching or routing

A

Point-to-point (unicast)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Messages are transmitted over a shared channel and received by all the nodes
Each node checks the address and if it not the intended recipient, ignores
Multi-cast: special case

A

Broadcast (multi-point)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Twisted pair
Coaxial
Fiber optic cable
Satellite
Microwave
Wireless

A

Communication Alternatives

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Software that ensures error-free, reliable and efficient communication between hosts

A

Communication Protocols

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

It has been suggested that the organization of distributed systems can be investigated along three orthogonal dimensions

A

Dimensions of the Problem

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

each application and its data execute at one site, and there is not communication with any other program.

A

No sharing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

all the programs are replicated at all sites, but data files are not. Accordingly, user requests are handled at the site where they originate, and the necessary data files are moved around the network.

A

Data sharing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

both data and programs may be shared, meaning that a program at a given site can request a service from another program at second site.

A

Data-plus program sharing

32
Q

The user requests do not change over time (difficult to find in real apps)

A

Static

33
Q

The user request change over time more commonly in DDBS

A

Dynamic

34
Q

is that designers do not have any information about how users will access the database.

A

One possibility

35
Q

is that designers have complete information, where the access pattern can reasonably be predicted and do not deviate signifiable from these predictions.

A

The second possibility

36
Q

is that designers have partial information, where there are deviations from the predictions.

A

The third possibility

37
Q

There are two approaches for developing any database, the top-down method and the bottom-up method. While these approaches appear radically different, they share the common goal of uniting a system by describing all of the interaction between the processes.

A

Distribution Design

38
Q

mostly in designing systems from scratch

mostly in homogeneous systems

A

Top-down

39
Q

when the databases already exist at a number of sites

A

Bottom-up

40
Q

method starts from the general and moves to the specific. In other words, you start with a general idea of what is needed for the system and then work your way down to the more specific details of how the system will interact.

A

The top-down design

41
Q

Defines the environment of the system and elicits both the data and processing needs of all potential database users. Also specifies where the final system is expected to stand with respect to the objectives of a distributed DBMS.

A

Requirement analysis.

42
Q

Defines the environment of the system and elicits both the data and processing needs of all potential database users. Also specifies where the final system is expected to stand with respect to the objectives of a distributed DBMS.

A

Requirement analysis.

43
Q

This activity deals with defining the interfaces for end users.

A

View design

44
Q

This is the process by which the enterprise is examined to determine entity types and relationships among these entities.

A

Conceptual design

45
Q

it is quite common to divide them into sub-relations, called fragments, which are then distributed

A

Rather than distributing relations

46
Q

consists of two steps: fragmentation and allocation

A

the distribution design activity

47
Q

the important issue is the appropriate unit of distribution to fragmentation. A relation per se (table), is not a suitable unit because if an application have views defined on a given relation, this should reside all at different sites

A

With respect to fragmentation

48
Q

two alternatives can be followed with the entire relation being the unit of distribution. Either the relation is not replicated and is stored at only one site, or it is replicated at all or some of the sites where the application reside.

A

For the above

49
Q

the issue is one of finding alternative ways of dividing a table into smaller ones. There are two alternatives for this: dividing it horizontally or dividing it vertically.

A

Relation instances are essentially tables

50
Q

each being treated as a unit, permits a number of transactions to execute concurrently. In addition, the fragmentation of relations typically results in the parallel execution of a single query by dividing it into a set of subqueries that operates on fragments.

A

the decomposition of a relation into fragments

51
Q

is an important decision that affects the performance of query execution.

A

The extend to which the database should be fragmented

52
Q

that is, not to fragment at all, to the other extreme, to fragment to the level individual tuples (in the case of horizontal fragmentation) or to the level of individual attributes (in the case of vertical fragmentation).

A

The degree of fragmentation goes from one extreme

53
Q

We will enforce the following three rules during fragmentation, which, together ensure that the database does not undergo semantic change during fragmentation.

A

Distribution Design Issues

54
Q

Decomposition of relation R into fragments R1, R2, …, Rn is complete if and only if each data item in R can also be found in some Ri

A

Completeness

55
Q

If relation R is decomposed into fragments R1, R2, …, Rn, then there should exist some relational operator ∇ such that

A

Reconstruction

56
Q

If relation R is decomposed into fragments R1, R2, …, Rn, and data item di is in Rj , then di should not be in any other fragment Rk (k ≠ j ).

A

Disjointness

57
Q

partitioned : each fragment resides at only one site

A

Non-replicated

58
Q

fully replicated : each fragment at each site partially replicated : each fragment at some of the sites

A

Replicated

59
Q

If read-only queries / update queries &laquo_space;1,replication is advantageous, otherwise replication may cause problems

A

Rule of thumb

60
Q

One aspect of distribution design is that too many factors contribute to an optional design. The logical organization of the database, the location of the applications, the access characteristics of the application to the database, and the properties of the computer system at each site all have an influence on distribution decisions.

A

Information requirements

61
Q

(HF)

A

Horizontal Fragmentation

62
Q

(PHF) It is performed using predicates that are defined on the original relation

A

Primary Horizontal Fragmentation

63
Q

(DHF) It is the partitioning of a relation that results from predicates being defined on another relation.

A

Derived Horizontal Fragmentation

64
Q

(VF)

A

Vertical Fragmentation

65
Q

(HF)

A

Hybrid Fragmentation

66
Q

The number of tuples of the relation that would be accessed by a user query which is specified according to a given minterm predicate mi

A

minterm selectivities: sel(mi )

67
Q

The frequency with which a user application qi accesses data.
Access frequency for a minterm predicate can also be defined.

A

access frequencies: acc(qi )

68
Q

Since Pr’ is complete and minimal, the selection predicates are complete

A

Completeness

69
Q

If relation R is fragmented into FR = {R1,R2,…,Rr}

A

Reconstruction

70
Q

Minterm predicates that form the basis of fragmentation should be mutually exclusive.

A

Disjointness

71
Q

Defined on a member relation of a link according to a selection operation specified on its owner

A

Derived Horizontal Fragmentation

72
Q

design methodology, physical clustering

A

Has been studied within the centralized context

73
Q

Two approaches :
grouping => attributes to fragments

splitting => relation to fragments

A

More difficult than horizontal, because more alternatives exist

74
Q

grouping

A

Overlapping fragments

75
Q

splitting

A

Non-overlapping fragments