GQL and SQL/PGQ: Theoretical Models and Expressive Power

Amélie Gheerbrant, Leonid Libkin, Liat Peterfreund, Alexandra Rogova
{"title":"GQL and SQL/PGQ: Theoretical Models and Expressive Power","authors":"Amélie Gheerbrant, Leonid Libkin, Liat Peterfreund, Alexandra Rogova","doi":"arxiv-2409.01102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"SQL/PGQ and GQL are very recent international standards for querying property\ngraphs: SQL/PGQ specifies how to query relational representations of property\ngraphs in SQL, while GQL is a standalone language for graph databases. The\nrapid industrial development of these standards left the academic community\ntrailing in its wake. While digests of the languages have appeared, we do not\nyet have concise foundational models like relational algebra and calculus for\nrelational databases that enable the formal study of languages, including their\nexpressiveness and limitations. At the same time, work on the next versions of\nthe standards has already begun, to address the perceived limitations of their\nfirst versions. Motivated by this, we initiate a formal study of SQL/PGQ and GQL,\nconcentrating on their concise formal model and expressiveness. For the former,\nwe define simple core languages -- Core GQL and Core PGQ -- that capture the\nessence of the new standards, are amenable to theoretical analysis, and fully\nclarify the difference between PGQ's bottom up evaluation versus GQL's linear,\nor pipelined approach. Equipped with these models, we both confirm the\nnecessity to extend the language to fill in the expressiveness gaps and\nidentify the source of these deficiencies. We complement our theoretical\nanalysis with an experimental study, demonstrating that existing workarounds in\nfull GQL and PGQ are impractical which further underscores the necessity to\ncorrect deficiencies in the language design.","PeriodicalId":501123,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - CS - Databases","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - CS - Databases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2409.01102","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

SQL/PGQ and GQL are very recent international standards for querying property graphs: SQL/PGQ specifies how to query relational representations of property graphs in SQL, while GQL is a standalone language for graph databases. The rapid industrial development of these standards left the academic community trailing in its wake. While digests of the languages have appeared, we do not yet have concise foundational models like relational algebra and calculus for relational databases that enable the formal study of languages, including their expressiveness and limitations. At the same time, work on the next versions of the standards has already begun, to address the perceived limitations of their first versions. Motivated by this, we initiate a formal study of SQL/PGQ and GQL, concentrating on their concise formal model and expressiveness. For the former, we define simple core languages -- Core GQL and Core PGQ -- that capture the essence of the new standards, are amenable to theoretical analysis, and fully clarify the difference between PGQ's bottom up evaluation versus GQL's linear, or pipelined approach. Equipped with these models, we both confirm the necessity to extend the language to fill in the expressiveness gaps and identify the source of these deficiencies. We complement our theoretical analysis with an experimental study, demonstrating that existing workarounds in full GQL and PGQ are impractical which further underscores the necessity to correct deficiencies in the language design.
GQL 和 SQL/PGQ:理论模型和表达能力
SQL/PGQ 和 GQL 是查询属性图的最新国际标准:SQL/PGQ 规定了如何用 SQL 查询属性图的关系表示,而 GQL 则是图数据库的独立语言。这些标准在工业界的迅速发展让学术界望尘莫及。虽然这些语言的摘要已经出现,但我们还没有简明的基础模型(如关系代数和关系数据库微积分)来对语言进行正式研究,包括语言的可执行性和局限性。与此同时,下一版标准的制定工作已经开始,以解决第一版标准的局限性。受此启发,我们开始对 SQL/PGQ 和 GQL 进行形式研究,重点关注它们的简明形式模型和表达能力。对于前者,我们定义了简单的核心语言--核心 GQL 和核心 PGQ--它们抓住了新标准的精髓,适合理论分析,并充分阐明了 PGQ 的自下而上评估与 GQL 的线性或流水线方法之间的区别。有了这些模型,我们就能确认是否有必要扩展语言以填补表达能力上的缺陷,并找出这些缺陷的根源。我们通过实验研究补充了我们的理论分析,证明现有的完整 GQL 和 PGQ 的变通方法是不切实际的,这进一步强调了纠正语言设计缺陷的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信