Fundamentals of Database Systems

Seventh Edition

Chapter 14
Basics of Functional
Dependencies and
Normalization for Relational
Databases

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Learning Objectives (1 of 3)
14.1 Informal Design Guidelines for Relational Databases
14.1.1 Semantics of the Relation Attributes
14.1.2 Redundant Information in Tuples and Update
Anomalies
14.1.3 Null Values in Tuples
14.1.4 Spurious Tuples
14.2 Functional Dependencies (FDs)
14.2.1 Definition of Functional Dependency

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Learning Objectives (2 of 3)
14.3 Normal Forms Based on Primary Keys
14.3.1 Normalization of Relations
14.3.2 Practical Use of Normal Forms
14.3.3 Definitions of Keys and Attributes Participating in Keys
14.3.4 First Normal Form
14.3.5 Second Normal Form
14.3.6 Third Normal Form
14.4 General Normal Form Definitions for 2NF and 3NF (For
Multiple Candidate Keys)
14.5 BCNF (Boyce-Codd Normal Form)

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Learning Objectives (3 of 3)
14.6 Multivalued Dependency and Fourth Normal Form
14.7 Join Dependencies and Fifth Normal Form

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.1 Informal Design Guidelines for
Relational Databases (1 of 2)
• What is relational database design?
– The grouping of attributes to form “good” relation
schemas
• Two levels of relation schemas
– The logical “user view” level
– The storage “base relation” level
• Design is concerned mainly with base relations
• What are the criteria for “good” base relations?

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.1 Informal Design Guidelines for
Relational Databases (2 of 2)
• We first discuss informal guidelines for good relational design
• Then we discuss formal concepts of functional dependencies
and normal forms
– 1NF (First Normal Form)
– 2NF (Second Normal Form)
– 3NF (Third Noferferferfewrmal Form)
– BCNF (Boyce-Codd Normal Form)
• Additional types of dependencies, further normal forms,
relational design algorithms by synthesis are discussed in
Chapter 15

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.1.1 Semantics of the Relational
Attributes Must Be Clear
• Guideline 1: Informally, each tuple in a relation should
represent one entity or relationship instance. (Applies to
individual relations and their attributes).
– Attributes of different entities (EMPLOYEEs,
DEPARTMENTs, PROJECTs) should not be mixed in the
same relation
– Only foreign keys should be used to refer to other entities
– Entity and relationship attributes should be kept apart as
much as possible.
• Bottom Line: Design a schema that can be explained easily
relation by relation. The semantics of attributes should be easy
to interpret.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 14.1 A Simplified COMPANY
Relational Database Schema

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.1.2 Redundant Information in Tuples
and Update Anomalies
• Information is stored redundantly
– Wastes storage
– Causes problems with update anomalies
▪ Insertion anomalies
▪ Deletion anomalies
▪ Modification anomalies

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Example of an Update Anomaly
• Consider the relation:
– EMP_PROJ(Emp#, Proj#, Ename, Pname,No_h ours)

• Update Anomaly:
– Changing the name of project number P1 from
“Billing” to “Customer-Accounting” may cause this
update to be made for all 100 employees working on
project P1.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Example of an Insert Anomaly
• Consider the relation:
– EMP_PROJ(Emp#, Proj#, Ename, Pname,No_hours)

• Insert Anomaly:
– Cannot insert a project unless an employee is
assigned to it.
• Conversely
– Cannot insert an employee unless an he/she is
assigned to a project.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Example of a Delete Anomaly
• Consider the relation:
–

• Delete Anomaly:
– When a project is deleted, it will result in deleting all
the employees who work on that project.
– Alternately, if an employee is the sole employee on a
project, deleting that employee would result in deleting
the corresponding project.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 14.3 Two Relation Schemas
Suffering from Update Anomalies
(a) EMP_DEPT and (b) EMP_PROJ

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 14.4 Sample States For EMP_DEPT
and EMP_PROJ
Sample states for
EMP_DEPT and
EMP_PROJ resulting
from applying
NATURAL JOIN to the
relations in Figure 14.2.
These may be stored
as base relations for
performance reasons.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Guideline for Redundant Information in
Tuples and Update Anomalies
• Guideline 2:
– Design a schema that does not suffer from the
insertion, deletion and update anomalies.
– If there are any anomalies present, then note them so
that applications can be made to take them into
account.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.1.3 Null Values in Tuples
• Guideline 3:
– Relations should be designed such that their tuples
will have as few NULL values as possible
– Attributes that are NULL frequently could be placed in
separate relations (with the primary key)
• Reasons for nulls:
– Attribute not applicable or invalid
– Attribute value unknown (may exist)
– Value known to exist, but unavailable

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.1.4 Generation of Spurious Tuples –
Avoid at Any Cost (1 of 2)
• Bad designs for a relational database may result in
erroneous results for certain JOIN operations
• The “lossless join” property is used to guarantee
meaningful results for join operations
• Guideline 4:
– The relations should be designed to satisfy the
lossless join condition.
– No spurious tuples should be generated by doing a
natural-join of any relations.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.1.4 Generation of Spurious Tuples –
Avoid at Any Cost (2 of 2)
• There are two important properties of decompositions:
a) Non-additive or losslessness of the corresponding join
b) Preservation of the functional dependencies.
• Note that:
– Property (a) is extremely important and cannot be
sacrificed.
– Property (b) is less stringent and may be sacrificed.
(See Chapter 15).

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.2 Functional Dependencies
• Functional dependencies (FDs)
– Are used to specify formal measures of the
“goodness” of relational designs
– And keys are used to define normal forms for
relations
– Are constraints that are derived from the meaning
and interrelationships of the data attributes
• A set of attributes X functionally determines a set of
attributes Y if the value of X determines a unique value
for Y

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.2.1 Defining Functional Dependencies
• X → Y holds if whenever two tuples have the same value
for X, they must have the same value for Y
– For any two tuples t1 and t2 in any relation instance
r  R  : If t1  X  = t 2  X  , then t1  Y  = t 2  Y 
• X → Y in R specifies a constraint on all relation
instances r (R)
• Written as X → Y can be displayed graphically on a
relation schema as in Figures. (denoted by the arrow:).
• FDs are derived from the real-world constraints on the
attributes
Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Examples of FD Constraints (1 of 2)
• Social security number determines employee name
– SSN → ENAME
• Project number determines project name and location
– PNUMBER → {PNAME, PLOCATION}
• Employee ssn and project number determines the hours
per week that the employee works on the project
– {SSN, PNUMBER} → HOURS

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Examples of FD Constraints (2 of 2)
• An FD is a property of the attributes in the schema R
• The constraint must hold on every relation instance r(R)
• If K is a key of R, then K functionally determines all
attributes in R
– (since we never have two distinct tuples with
t1[K]=t2[K])

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Defining FDs From Instances
• Note that in order to define the FDs, we need to
understand the meaning of the attributes involved and the
relationship between them.
• An FD is a property of the attributes in the schema R
• Given the instance (population) of a relation, all we can
conclude is that an FD may exist between certain
attributes.
• What we can definitely conclude is – that certain FDs do
not exist because there are tuples that show a violation
of those dependencies.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 14.7 Ruling Out FDs
Note that given the state of the TEACH relation, we can say
that the FD: Text → Course may exist. However, the FDs
Teacher → Course, Teacher →Text and
Couse → Text are ruled out.
TEACH

Teacher Course Text

Smith Data Structures Bartram
Smith Data Management Martin
Hall Compilers Hoffman
Brown Data Structures Horowitz

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 14.8 What FDs May Exist?
• A relation A relation R(A, B, C, D) with its extension.
• Which FDs may exist in this relation?

A B C D
a1 b1 c1 d1
a1 b2 c2 d2
a2 b2 c2 d3
a3 b3 c4 d3

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.3 Normal Forms Based on Primary
Keys
3.1 Normalization of Relations
3.2 Practical Use of Normal Forms
3.3 Definitions of Keys and Attributes Participating in Keys
3.4 First Normal Form
3.5 Second Normal Form
3.6 Third Normal Form

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.3.1 Normalization of Relations (1 of 2)
• Normalization:
– The process of decomposing unsatisfactory “bad”
relations by breaking up their attributes into smaller
relations
• Normal form:
– Condition using keys and FDs of a relation to certify
whether a relation schema is in a particular normal
form

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.3.1 Normalization of Relations (2 of 2)
• 2NF, 3NF, BCNF
– based on keys and FDs of a relation schema
• 4NF
– based on keys, multi-valued dependencies: MVDs;
• 5NF
– based on keys, join dependencies: JDs
• Additional properties may be needed to ensure a good
relational design (lossless join, dependency preservation;
see Chapter 15)

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.3.2 Practical Use of Normal Forms
• Normalization is carried out in practice so that the resulting designs
are of high quality and meet the desirable properties
• The practical utility of these normal forms becomes questionable
when the constraints on which they are based are hard to
understand or to detect
• The database designers need not normalize to the highest possible
normal form
– (usually up to 3NF and BCNF. 4NF rarely used in practice.)
• Denormalization:
– The process of storing the join of higher normal form relations as
a base relation—which is in a lower normal form

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.3.3 Definitions of Keys and Attributes
Participating in Keys (1 of 2)
• A superkey of a relation schema is R  { A1, A2 , ...., An }
a set of attributes S subset-of R with the property that no
two tuples t1 and t2 in any legal relation state r of R will
have  t1[S ] = t 2 [S ]
• A key K is a superkey with the additional property that
removal of any attribute from K will cause K not to be a
superkey any more.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.3.3 Definitions of Keys and Attributes
Participating in Keys (2 of 2)
• If a relation schema has more than one key, each is
called a candidate key.
– One of the candidate keys is arbitrarily designated to
be the primary key, and the others are called
secondary keys.
• A Prime attribute must be a member of some candidate
key
• A Nonprime attribute is not a prime attribute—that is, it
is not a member of any candidate key.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.3.4 First Normal Form
• Disallows
– composite attributes
– multivalued attributes
– nested relations; attributes whose values for an
individual tuple are non-atomic
• Considered to be part of the definition of a relation
• Most RDBMSs allow only those relations to be defined
that are in First Normal Form

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 14.9 Normalization into 1NF

(a) A relation
schema that is not in
1NF. (b) Sample
state of relation
DEPARTMENT. (c)
1NF version of the
same relation with
redundancy.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 14.10 Normalizing Nested Relations
into 1NF
(a) Schema of the EMP_PROJ
relation with a nested relation
attribute PROJS. (b) Sample
extension of the EMP_PROJ
relation showing nested
relations within each tuple. (c)
Decomposition of EMP_PROJ
into relations EMP_PROJ1 and
EMP_PROJ2 by propagating
the primary key.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
 14.3.5 Second Normal Form (1 of 2)
• Uses the concepts of FDs, primary key
• Definitions
– Prime attribute: An attribute that is member of the primary
key K
– Full functional dependency: a FD Y → Z where removal of
any attribute from Y means the FD does not hold any more
• Examples:
– {SSN, PNUMBER} → HOURS is a full FD since neither SSN
→ HOURS nor PNUMBER → HOURS hold
– {SSN, PNUMBER} → ENAME is not a full FD (it is called a
partial dependency ) since SSN → ENAME also holds

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.3.5 Second Normal Form (2 of 2)
• A relation schema R is in second normal form (2NF) if
every non-prime attribute A in R is fully functionally
dependent on the primary key
• R can be decomposed into 2NF relations via the process
of 2NF normalization or “second normalization”

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 14.11 Normalizing into 2NF and 3NF

(a) Normalizing
EMP_PROJ into
2NF relations.
(b) Normalizing
EMP_DEPT into
3NF relations.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 14.12 Normalization into 2NF and
3NF (1 of 2)

(a) The LOTS relation with its functional dependencies FD1 through FD4. (b)
Decomposing into the 2NF relations LOTS1 and LOTS2.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 14.12 Normalization into 2NF and
3NF (2 of 2)

(c) Decomposing LOTS1 into the 3NF relations LOTS1A and LOTS1B. (d)
Progressive normalization of LOTS into a 3NF design.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.3.6 Third Normal Form (1 of 2)
• Definition:
– Transitive functional dependency: a FD X → Z that
can be derived from two FDs X → Y and Y → Z
• Examples:
– SSN → DMGRSSN is a transitive FD
▪ Since SSN → DNUMBER and DNUMBER → DM
GRSSN hold
– SSN → ENAME is non-transitive
▪ Since there is no set of attributes X where SSN →
X and X → ENAME

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.3.6 Third Normal Form (2 of 2)
• A relation schema R is in third normal form (3NF) if it is in 2NF and
no non-prime attribute A in R is transitively dependent on the primary
key
• R can be decomposed into 3NF relations via the process of 3NF
normalization
• NOTE:
– In X → Y and Y → Z, with X as the primary key, we consider this
a problem only if Y is not a candidate key.
– When Y is a candidate key, there is no problem with the
transitive dependency .
– E.g., Consider EMP (SSN, Emp#, Salary ).
▪ Here, SSN → Emp# → Salary and Emp# is a candidate key.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Normal Forms Defined Informally
• 1st normal form
– All attributes depend on the key
• 2nd normal form
– All attributes depend on the whole key
• 3rd normal form
– All attributes depend on nothing but the key

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.4 General Normal Form Definitions
(For Multiple Keys)
• The above definitions consider the primary key only
• The following more general definitions take into account
relations with multiple candidate keys
• Any attribute involved in a candidate key is a prime
attribute
• All other attributes are called non-prime attributes.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.4.1 General Definition of 2NF
(For Multiple Candidate Keys)
• A relation schema R is in second normal form (2NF) if
every non-prime attribute A in R is fully functionally
dependent on every key of R
• In Figure 14.12 the FD
County_name → Tax_rate violates 2NF.
So second normalization converts LOTS into
LOTS1 (Property_id#,County_name, Lot#, Area, Price)
LOTS2 (County_name,Tax_rate)

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.4.2 General Definition of Third Normal
Form
• Definition:
– Superkey of relation schema R - a set of attributes
S of R that contains a key of R
– A relation schema R is in third normal form (3NF)
if whenever a FD X → A holds in R, then either:
(a) X is a superkey of R, or
(b) A is a prime attribute of R
• LOTS1 relation violates 3NF because
Area → Price ; and Area is not a superkey in LOTS1.
(see Figure 14.12).

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.4.3 Interpreting the General Definition
of Third Normal Form (1 of 2)
• Consider the 2 conditions in the Definition of 3NF:
– A relation schema R is in third normal form (3NF) if whenever a
FD X → A holds in R, then either:
(a) X is a superkey of R, or
(b) A is a prime attribute of R
• Condition (a) catches two types of violations :
– one where a prime attribute functionally determines a non-prime
attribute. This catches 2NF violations due to non-full functional
dependencies.
– second, where a non-prime attribute functionally determines a
non-prime attribute. This catches 3NF violations due to a
transitive dependency.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.4.3 Interpreting the General Definition
of Third Normal Form (2 of 2)
• Alternative Definition of 3NF: We can restate the definition
as:
– A relation schema R is in third normal form (3NF) if every
non-prime attribute in R meets both of these conditions:
▪ It is fully functionally dependent on every key of R
▪ It is non-transitively dependent on every key of R
– Note that stated this way, a relation in 3NF also meets the
requirements for 2NF.
• The condition (b) from the last slide takes care of the
dependencies that “slip through” (are allowable to) 3NF but
are “caught by” BCNF which we discuss next.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.5 BCNF (Boyce-Codd Normal Form)
• A relation schema R is in Boyce-Codd Normal Form (BCNF)
if whenever an FD X → A holds in R, then X is a superkey of
R
• Each normal form is strictly stronger than the previous one
– Every 2NF relation is in 1NF
– Every 3NF relation is in 2NF
– Every BCNF relation is in 3NF
• There exist relations that are in 3NF but not in BCNF
• Hence BCNF is considered a stronger form of 3NF
• The goal is to have each relation in BCNF (or 3NF)

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 14.13 Boyce-Codd Normal Form

(a) BCNF
normalization of
LOTS1A with the
functional
dependency FD2
being lost in the
decomposition. (b)
A schematic
relation with FDs; it
is in 3NF, but not in
BCNF due to the
f.d. C → B

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 14.14 A Relation Teach That is in 3N
F but Not in BCNF

TEACH
Student Course Instructor
Narayan Database Mark
Smith Database Navathe
Smith Operating Systems Ammar
Smith Theory Schulman
Wallace Database Mark
Wallace Operating Systems Ahamad
Wong Database Omiecinski
Zelaya Database Navathe
Narayan Operating Systems Ammar

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Achieving the BCNF by Decomposition (1 of 2)
• Two FDs exist in the relation TEACH:
– fd1: { student, course} → instructor
– fd2: instructor → course
• {student, course} is a candidate key for this relation and
that the dependencies shown follow the pattern in Figure
14.13 (b).
– So this relation is in 3NF but not in BCNF
• A relation NOT in BCNF should be decomposed so as to
meet this property, while possibly forgoing the
preservation of all functional dependencies in the
decomposed relations.
– (See Algorithm 15.3)
Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Achieving the BCNF by Decomposition (2 of 2)
• Three possible decompositions for relation TEACH
– D1: {student, instructor} and {student, course}
– D2: {course, instructor} and {course, student}
– D3: {instructor, course} and {instructor, student} 

• All three decompositions will lose fd1.

– We have to settle for sacrificing the functional dependency preservation.
But we cannot sacrifice the non-additivity property after decomposition.
• Out of the above three, only the 3rd decomposition will not generate spurious
tuples after join. (and hence has the non-additivity property).
• A test to determine whether a binary decomposition (decomposition into two
relations) is non-additive (lossless) is discussed under Property NJB on the
next slide. We then show how the third decomposition above meets the
property.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Test for Checking Non-Additivity of Binary
Relational Decompositions (1 of 2)
• Testing Binary Decompositions for Lossless Join (Non-additive Join)
Property
– Binary Decomposition: Decomposition of a relation R into two
relations.
– PROPERTY NJB (non-additive join test for binary
decompositions): A decomposition D  {R1, R2 } of R has the
lossless join property with respect to a set of functional
dependencies F on R if and only if either

▪ ,The f.d.   R1  R2    R1 - R2   isinF ,or

+

▪ ,The f.d.   R1  R2    R2 - R1   isinF .

+

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Test for Checking Non-Additivity of Binary
Relational Decompositions (2 of 2)
• If you apply the NJB test to the 3 decompositions of the
TEACH relation:
– D1 gives Student → Instructor or Student → Course,
none of which is true.
– D2 gives Course → Instructor or Course → Student,
none of which is true.
– However, in D3 we get Instructor → Course or
Instructor → Student.
• Since Instructor → Course is indeed true, the NJB
property is satisfied and D3 is determined as a non-
additive (good) decomposition.
Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
General Procedure for Achieving BCNF
When a Relation Fails BCNF
• Here we make use the algorithm from Chapter 15
(Algorithm 15.5):
– Let R be the relation not in BCNF, let X be a subset-of R,
and let X  A be the FD that causes a violation of BCNF.
Then R may be decomposed into two relations:
– (i) R – A and X  A.
– If either R – A or X  A. is not in BCNF, repeat the process.
Note that the f.d. that violated BCNF in TEACH was Instructor 
Course. Hence its BCNF decomposition would be :
 TEACH – COURSE  and (Instructor  Course), which gives
the relations: (Instructor, Student) and (Instructor, Course) that we
obtained before in decomposition D3.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.6 Multivalued Dependencies and Fourth
Normal Form (1 of 2)
Definition:
• A multivalued dependency (MVD) X Y specified on relation
schema R, where X and Y are both subsets of R, specifies the
following constraint on any relation state r of R: If two tuples t1 and t2
exist in r such that t1[ X ] = t 2 [ X ], then two tuples t3 and t4 should also
exist in r with the following properties, where we use Z to denote
(R2 ( X  Y )) :
– t3  Χ  = t4  Χ  = t1  Χ  = t2  Χ  .

– t 3  Y  = t1  Y  and t 4  Y  = t2  Y  .
– t3  Z  = t2  Z  and t4  Z  = t1  Z  .

• An MVD X Y in R is called a trivial MVD if (a) Y is a subset of

X, or (b) X  Y = R.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.6 Multivalued Dependencies and Fourth
Normal Form (2 of 2)
Definition:
• A relation schema R is in 4N F with respect to a set of dependencies
F (that includes functional dependencies and multivalued
dependencies) if, for every nontrivial multivalued dependency
Y in F + X is a superkey for R.

– Note: F + is the (complete) set of all dependencies (functional

or multivalued) that will hold in every relation state r of R that
satisfies F. It is also called the closure of F.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Figure 14.15 Fourth and Fifth Normal Forms

(a) The EMP relation with two MVDs: Ename  Pname and Ename  Dname.
Dname. (b) Decomposing the EMP relation into two 4NF relations
EMP_PROJECTS and EMP_DEPENDENTS. (c) The relation SUPPLY with no
MVDs is in 4NF but not in 5NF if it has the JD(R1, R2, R3). (d) Decomposing the
relation SUPPLY into the 5NF relations R1, R2, R3.
Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.7 Join Dependencies and Fifth Normal Form (1 of 2)

Definition:
• A join dependency (JD), denoted by JD(R1, R2 , ..., Rn ),
specified on relation schema R, specifies a constraint on the states r
of R.
– The constraint states that every legal state r of R should
have a non-additive join decomposition into R1, R2, ..., Rn;
that is, for every such r we have
  π R1  r  ,π R2  r  ,…,π Rn  r   = r
– Note: an MVD is a special case of a JD where n = 2.

• A join dependency JD(R1, R2 , ..., Rn ), specified on relation schema R,

is a trivial JD if one of the relation schemas Ri in JD(R1, R2 , ..., Rn ),
is equal to R.
Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
14.7 Join Dependencies and Fifth Normal Form (2 of 2)

Definition:
• A relation schema R is in fifth normal form (5NF) (or Project-Join
Normal Form (PJNF)) with respect to a set F of functional,
multivalued, and join dependencies if,
– for every nontrivial join dependency JD(R1, R2 , ..., Rn ) in F +
(that is, implied by F),
▪ every Ri is a superkey of R.
– Discovering join dependencies in practical databases with
hundreds of relations is next to impossible. Therefore, 5NF is
rarely used in practice.

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Chapter Summary
• Informal Design Guidelines for Relational Databases
• Functional Dependencies (FDs)
• Normal Forms (1NF, 2NF, 3NF)Based on Primary Keys
• General Normal Form Definitions of 2NF and 3NF (For
Multiple Keys)
• BCNF (Boyce-Codd Normal Form)
• Fourth and Fifth Normal Forms

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Copyright

Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Copyright © 2016, 2011, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved