jwb@cepmax.ncsu.edu (John W. Baugh Jr.) (03/04/91)
I'd like some references on what it means for a database (e.g., the relational kind) to be "correct", the role of "integrity constraints", and so forth. Obviously, if one treats a dbms as just an implementation of a data type then one can define an abstraction function and do Hoare-style verification. Otherwise, general dbms queries may be thought to compromise abstraction by directly accessing the internal representation (i.e., the database itself). So what does one do, just enforce a representation invariant? Is this what some call "integrity constraints"? John Baugh jwb@cepmax.ncsu.edu
straub@jogger.cs.umd.edu (Pablo A. Straub) (03/05/91)
In article <1991Mar4.155552.27494@ncsu.edu> jwb@cepmax.ncsu.edu writes: >I'd like some references on what it means for a database (e.g., the >relational kind) to be "correct", the role of "integrity constraints", >and so forth. [...] Is this what some >call "integrity constraints"? > >John Baugh >jwb@cepmax.ncsu.edu For a good and readable treatment of integrity constraints see C.J. Date, An introduction to database systems, volume 1, Fourth Ed., Addison Wesley, 1986. Integrity constraints are covered in chap. 12, section 15.4, chapter 17 and sections 19.5 and 19.6. The second volume (1983) has a chapter devoted to integrity (chapter 2). Pablo Straub straub@cs.umd.edu