Welcome to D
SIGMOD 2005
PODS 2005
SIGMOD-RECOR
CIDR 2005
CIKM 2005
COMAD 2005
CVDB 2005
DaMoN 2005
Data Enginee
DEBS05
DMSN 2005
DOLAP 2005
GIR 2005
GIS 2005
Hypertext 20
ICDE 2005
ICDM 2005
IHIS 2005
IQIS 2005
JCDL 2005
KRAS 2005
MDM 2005
MIR 2005
MobiDE 2005
P2PIR 2005
RIDE 2005
SBBD 2005
SIGIR 2005
SIGIR-FORUM
SIGKDD 2005
SIGKDD-EXP
SSDBM 2005
TIME 2005
TKDE 2005
<<< = TKDE'05 Pape>>>
TODS 2005
VLDB 2005
VLDBJ 2005
WebDB 2005
WIDM 2005

Selection of views to materialize in a data warehouse


Himanshu Gupta and Inderpal Singh Mumick

  View Paper (PDF)  

Return to January 2005, Volume 17, Issue 1


Abstract

A data warehouse stores materialized views of data from one or more sources, with the purpose of efficiently implementing decision-support or OLAP queries. One of the most important decisions in designing a data warehouse is the selection of materialized views to be maintained at the warehouse. The goal is to select an appropriate set of views that minimizes total query response time and the cost of maintaining the selected views, given a limited amount of resource, e.g., materialization time, storage space, etc. In This work, we have developed a theoretical framework for the general problem of selection of views in a data warehouse. We present polynomial-time heuristics for a selection of views to optimize total query response time under a disk-space constraint, for some important special cases of the general data warehouse scenario, viz.: 1) an AND view graph, where each query/view has a unique evaluation, e.g., when a multiple-query optimizer can be used to general a global evaluation plan for the queries, and 2) an OR view graph, in which any view can be computed from any one of its related views, e.g., data cubes. We present proofs showing that the algorithms are guaranteed to provide a solution that is fairly close to (within a constant factor ratio of) the optimal solution. We extend our heuristic to the general AND-OR view graphs. Finally, we address in detail the view-selection problem under the maintenance cost constraint and present provably competitive heuristics.


©2006 Association for Computing Machinery