Chapter 12: Query Processing

Database System Concepts, 6th Ed.

©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
See www.db-book.com for conditions on re-use
 Chapter 12: Query Processing
 Overview
 Measures of Query Cost
 Selection Operation
 Join Operation
 Other Operations
 Evaluation of Expressions

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.2 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Basic Steps in Query Processing
1. Parsing and translation
2. Optimization
3. Evaluation

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.3 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Basic Steps in Query Processing (Cont.)
 Parsing and translation
 translate the query into its internal form. This is then translated
into relational algebra.
 Parser checks syntax, verifies relations
 Evaluation
 The query-execution engine takes a query-evaluation plan,
executes that plan, and returns the answers to the query.

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.4 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Basic Steps in Query Processing : Optimization
 A relational algebra expression may have many equivalent expressions
 E.g., salary75000(salary(instructor)) is equivalent to
salary(salary75000(instructor))
Both expressions produce the same result because:
The selection (σ) operation filters rows based on the condition salary < 75000.
The projection (π) operation then selects only the salary column from the result.
Since the filtering condition salary < 75000 only involves the salary attribute, there is no
dependency on any other attribute. Therefore, the order of applying projection and
selection does not matter in this case.
 Each relational algebra operation can be evaluated using one of several different algorithms
 Correspondingly, a relational-algebra expression can be evaluated in many ways.
 Annotated expression specifying detailed evaluation strategy is called an evaluation-plan.
 E.g., can use an index on salary to find instructors with salary < 75000,
 or can perform complete relation scan and discard instructors with salary  75000
Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.5 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Deciding which is "better"
 σsalary<75000(πsalary(instructor))
 πsalary(σsalary<75000(instructor))
Which is better depends on the context, but in general, Expression 2 (πsalary(σsalary<75000(instructor))) is
more efficient and preferred.
Efficiency of Operations
Expression 1:
The projection (πsalary(instructor)) creates a temporary table with only the salary column.
Then, the selection (σsalary<75000) is applied to filter rows in this temporary table.
This might process more data than necessary because projection happens before filtering, potentially creating
unnecessary intermediate results.
Expression 2:
The selection (σsalary<75000(instructor)) filters rows directly on the instructor table, reducing the size of the
intermediate result early.
Then, the projection (πsalary) operates on this smaller, filtered dataset.
This approach minimizes the amount of data processed during projection by reducing the number of rows first.
Expression 2 is more efficient because filtering (selection) first reduces the data size before performing
projection.
Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.6 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Basic Steps: Optimization (Cont.)
 Query Optimization: Amongst all equivalent evaluation plans choose the one with lowest
cost.
 Cost is estimated using statistical information from the
database catalog
 e.g. number of tuples in each relation, size of tuples, etc.
 In this chapter we study
 How to measure query costs
 Algorithms for evaluating relational algebra operations
 How to combine algorithms for individual operations in order to evaluate a complete
expression
 In Chapter 14
 We study how to optimize queries, that is, how to find an evaluation plan with lowest
estimated cost

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.7 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Measures of Query Cost
 Cost is generally measured as total elapsed time for answering query
 Many factors contribute to time cost
 disk accesses, CPU, or even network communication
 Typically disk access is the predominant cost, and is also relatively easy to
estimate. Measured by taking into account
 Number of seeks * average-seek-cost
 Number of blocks read * average-block-read-cost
 Number of blocks written * average-block-write-cost
 Cost to write a block is greater than cost to read a block
– data is read back after being written to ensure that the write was
successful

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.8 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Measures of Query Cost (Cont.)
 For simplicity we just use the number of block transfers from disk and
the number of seeks as the cost measures
 tT – time to transfer one block
 tS – time for one seek
 Cost for b block transfers plus S seeks
b * tT + S * t S
 We ignore CPU costs for simplicity
 Real systems do take CPU cost into account
 We do not include cost to writing output to disk in our cost formulae

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.9 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Measures of Query Cost (Cont.)
 Several algorithms can reduce disk IO by using extra buffer space
 Amount of real memory available to buffer depends on other
concurrent queries and OS processes, known only during execution
 We often use worst case estimates, assuming only the minimum
amount of memory needed for the operation is available
 Required data may be buffer resident already, avoiding disk I/O
 But hard to take into account for cost estimation

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.10 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Selection Operation
 File scan
 Algorithm A1 (linear search). Scan each file block and test all records to see whether they
satisfy the selection condition.
 Cost estimate = br block transfers + 1 seek
 br denotes number of blocks containing records from relation r
 If selection is on a key attribute, can stop on finding record
 cost = (br /2) block transfers + 1 seek
 Linear search can be applied regardless of
 selection condition or
 ordering of records in the file, or
 availability of indices
 Note: binary search generally does not make sense since data is not stored consecutively
 except when there is an index available,
 and binary search requires more seeks than index search

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.11 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Example
Key Attribute: Imagine a table with br = 100 blocks, and you’re
A key attribute uniquely identifies each record in a relation (e.g., a searching for a record with a specific key (e.g., ID =
primary key or a candidate key). 123)
Block Transfers:
Searching for a record using a key guarantees that, at most, one
On average, the search will stop after scanning 50
matching record exists.
blocks (br / 2).
Cost Components: Seek Time:1 Seek is required to position the disk head
Block Transfers (br / 2): at the first block.
br represents the total number of blocks (disk pages) in the Total Cost = (100 / 2) block transfers + 1 seek = 50
relation. block transfers + 1 seek.
If no index is available, a linear search is performed by scanning
the blocks.
On average, the search will terminate halfway through the relation,
so the expected number of block transfers is br / 2.
Seek Time (+1 seek):
A seek refers to the time it takes for the disk head to locate the
starting position of the block on the disk. This happens once when
the search begins.

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.12 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Selections Using Indices
 Index scan – search algorithms that use an index
 selection condition must be on search-key of index.
 A2 (primary index, equality on key). Retrieve a single record that
satisfies the corresponding equality condition
 Cost = (hi + 1) * (tT + tS) hi  is the height of the index structure

 A3 (primary index, equality on nonkey) Retrieve multiple records.

 Records will be on consecutive blocks
 Let b = number of blocks containing matching records
 Cost = hi * (tT + tS) + tS + tT * b

nonkey  non-primary attribute

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.13 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Selections Using Indices
 A4 (secondary index, equality on nonkey).
 Retrieve a single record if the search-key is a candidate key
 Cost = (hi + 1) * (tT + tS)
 Retrieve multiple records if search-key is not a candidate key
 each of n matching records may be on a different block
 Cost = (hi + n) * (tT + tS)
– Can be very expensive!

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.14 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Selections Involving Comparisons
 Can implement selections of the form 
AV (r) or A  V(r) by using
 a linear file scan,
 or by using indices in the following ways:
 A5 (primary index, comparison). (Relation is sorted on A)
 For A  V(r) use index to find first tuple  v and scan relation sequentially from there
 For AV (r) just scan relation sequentially till first tuple > v; do not use index
 A6 (secondary index, comparison).
 For A  V(r) use index to find first index entry  v and scan index sequentially from
there, to find pointers to records.
 For AV (r) just scan leaf pages of index finding pointers to records, till first entry > v
 In either case, retrieve records that are pointed to
– requires an I/O for each record
– Linear file scan may be cheaper

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.15 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 The notation 𝜎𝜃1∧𝜃2∧⋯∧𝜃𝑛(𝑟) comes from relational algebra.

σ (sigma): This represents the selection operation in relational algebra. It filters rows from a relation based on a condition.

𝜃1∧𝜃2∧⋯∧𝜃𝑛​: This represents a set of conditions that must all be true for a row to be included in the result.

The ∧ (AND) operator means that all conditions 𝜃1,𝜃2,…,𝜃𝑛 must hold for a tuple (row) to be selected.
𝑟: This denotes the relation (table) from which tuples (rows) are selected.

The expression 𝜎𝜃1∧𝜃2∧⋯∧𝜃𝑛(𝑟)

means: Select all tuples from relation 𝑟 that satisfy all the conditions 𝜃1, 𝜃2,..., 𝜃𝑛

Example: Suppose we have a Students table with attributes (ID, Name, Age, Grade):
ID Name Age Grade
101 Alice 20 A
102 Bob 22 B
103 Eve 21 A
104 John 22 C

If we want to select students who are older than 20 and have a Grade of ‘A’ we write: 𝜎Age>20 ∧Grade=′ 𝐴′(Students)

This results in:

ID Name Age Grade
103 Eve 21 A
Thus, the selection operation extracts only the relevant tuples that meet the specified conditions.

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.16 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Implementation of Complex Selections
 Conjunction: 1 2. . . n(r)
 A7 (conjunctive selection using one index).
 Select a combination of i and algorithms A1 through A7 that produces the least cost for i (r). A single-column
index (or a single-column indexed search) is used when only one attribute in the conjunctive selection has an index.
 A8 (conjunctive selection using composite index).
Example: SELECT * FROM Students WHERE Age > 20 AND Grade = 'A';
 Use appropriate composite (multiple-key) index if available.
 A9 (conjunctive selection by intersection of identifiers).
Use the index on Age > 20  Retrieve row IDs where Age > 20 → {102, 103, 104}
Use the index on Grade = ‘A’  Retrieve row IDs where Grade = 'A' → {101, 103}
Find the intersection of both sets{102, 103, 104} ∩ {101, 103} = {103} 
Retrieve full row for ID = 103Result: (103, Eve, 21, A)
 Requires indices with record pointers.
 Use the corresponding index for each condition and take the intersection of all the obtained sets of record pointers.
 Then fetch records from the file
 If some conditions do not have appropriate indices, apply the test in memory.

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.17 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Algorithms for Complex Selections
 Disjunction:1 2 . . . n (r).
 A10 (disjunctive selection by union of identifiers).
 Applicable if all conditions have available indices.
 Otherwise use linear scan.
 Use corresponding index for each condition, and take union of all the
obtained sets of record pointers.
 Then fetch records from file
 Negation: (r)
 Use linear scan on file
 If very few records satisfy , and an index is applicable to 
 Find satisfying records using index and fetch from file

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.18 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Join Operation
 Several different algorithms to implement joins
 Nested-loop join
 Block nested-loop join
 Indexed nested-loop join
 Merge-join
 Choice based on cost estimate
 Examples use the following information
 Number of records of student: 5,000 takes: 10,000
 Number of blocks of students: 100 takes: 400

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.19 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Nested-Loop Join Students Table
Student_ID Name Course_ID
 To compute the theta join r 1 Alice 101
 s
for each tuple tr in r do begin 2 Bob 102
for each tuple ts in s do begin 3 Eve 103
test pair (tr,ts) to see if they satisfy the join condition 
Courses Table
if they do, add tr • ts to the result.
Course_ID Course_Name
end
end
101 Math
102 Science
 r is called the outer relation and s the inner relation of the join.
103 History
 Requires no indices and can be used with any kind of join condition.
 Expensive since it examines every pair of tuples in the two relations. SELECT Students.Student_ID, Students.Name, Courses.Course_Name
FROM Students
JOIN Courses ON Students.Course_ID = Courses.Course_ID;

Nested-Loop Join output

Student_ID Name Course_Name
1 Alice Math
2 Bob Science
3 Eve History
Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.20 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Nested-Loop Join (Cont.)
 In the worst case, if there is enough memory only to hold one block of each
relation, the estimated cost is
nr  bs + br block transfers, plus
n r + br seeks
 If the smaller relation fits entirely in memory, use that as the inner relation.
 Reduces cost to br + bs block transfers and 2 seeks
 Assuming worst case memory availability cost estimate is
 with student as outer relation:
 5000  400 + 100 = 2,000,100 block transfers,
 5000 + 100 = 5100 seeks
 with takes as the outer relation
 10000  100 + 400 = 1,000,400 block transfers and 10,400 seeks
 If smaller relation (student) fits entirely in memory, the cost estimate will be
500 block transfers.
 Block nested-loops algorithm (next slide) is preferable.

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.21 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Block Nested-Loop Join
 Variant of nested-loop join in which every block of inner
relation is paired with every block of outer relation.
for each block Br of r do begin
for each block Bs of s do begin
for each tuple tr in Br do begin
for each tuple ts in Bs do begin
Check if (tr,ts) satisfy the join condition
if they do, add tr • ts to the result.
end
end
end
end

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.22 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Block Nested-Loop Join (Cont.)
 Worst case estimate: b  b + b block transfers + 2 * b seeks
r s r r
 Each block in the inner relation s is read once for each block in the outer relation
 Best case: b + b block transfers + 2 seeks.
r s
 Improvements to nested loop and block nested loop algorithms:
 In block nested-loop, use M — 2 disk blocks as blocking unit for outer relations,
where M = memory size in blocks; use remaining two blocks to buffer inner
relation and output

Cost = br / (M-2)  bs + br block transfers +
2 br / (M-2) seeks
 If equi-join attribute forms a key or inner relation, stop inner loop on first match
 Scan inner loop forward and backward alternately, to make use of the blocks
remaining in buffer (with LRU replacement)
 Use index on inner relation if available (next slide)

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.23 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Indexed Nested-Loop Join
 Index lookups can replace file scans if
 join is an equi-join or natural join and
 an index is available on the inner relation’s join attribute
 Can construct an index just to compute a join.
 For each tuple tr in the outer relation r, use the index to look up tuples in s that satisfy the join condition with
tuple tr.
 Worst case: buffer has space for only one page of r, and, for each tuple in r, we perform an index lookup on s.
 Cost of the join: br (tT + tS) + nr  c
 Where c is the cost of traversing index and fetching all matching s tuples for one tuple or r
 c can be estimated as cost of a single selection on s using the join condition.
 If indices are available on join attributes of both r and s,
use the relation with fewer tuples as the outer relation.
Equi-Join: It is a join where tables are combined using an equality (=) condition on a common column.
It requires specifying the join condition explicitly in the ON clause.
Ex: JOIN departments ON employees.department_id = departments.id;
The resulting table contains all columns from both joined tables, including duplicate column names.
Natural Join: It is a type of Equi-Join but does not require an explicit join condition.It automatically joins tables based on
all columns with the same name in both tables.
The resulting table eliminates duplicate column names.
Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.24 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Example of Nested-Loop Join Costs
 Compute student takes, with student as the outer relation.
 Let takes have a primary B+-tree index on the attribute ID, which contains 20 entries in
each index node.
 Since takes has 10,000 tuples, the height of the tree is 4 (log 10,000), and one
more access is needed to find the actual data
 student has 5000 tuples
 Cost of block nested loops join
 400*100 + 100 = 40,100 block transfers + 2 * 100 = 200 seeks
 assuming worst case memory
 may be significantly less with more memory
 Cost of indexed nested loops join
 100 + 5000 * 5 = 25,100 block transfers and seeks.
 CPU cost likely to be less than that for block nested loops join

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.25 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Further Explanation of the previous example
Understanding the Data Given
student table: 5,000 tuples
takes table: 10,000 tuples
takes has a B+ tree index on the attribute ID
Each index node contains 20 entries.
The height of the tree is 4, meaning 4 block accesses are needed to reach the index leaf node.
One additional access is needed to fetch the actual data.

Cost of Block Nested Loops Join

The block nested loop join processes student as the outer relation and takes as the inner relation.
If each block holds 100 tuples, the number of blocks for student is 5000/100 = 50 blocks, and for takes,
it is 10,000/100 = 100 blocks.

400×100+100=40,100 block transfers

400 represents the total number of blocks of student processed in iterations, considering available
memory constraints B+ depth is 4 (block) and assuming.
Assume that each block (page) holds 100 tuples.
Seeks cost: 2×100=200 (2 tables)

Cost of Indexed Nested Loops Join

Since takes has a B+ tree index on ID, for each tuple in student, an index lookup is performed.
100+5000×5=25,100 block transfers and seeks

Block nested loops join has a higher cost (40,100 block transfers + 200 seeks).
Indexed nested loops join has a lower cost (25,100 block transfers and seeks) due to the efficiency of the B+ tree index.
The performance depends on the availability of indexes and memory size.

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.26 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Merge-Join
1. Sort both relations on their join attribute (if not already sorted on the join attributes).
2. Merge the sorted relations to join them
1. Join step is similar to the merge stage of the sort-merge algorithm.
2. Main difference is handling of duplicate values in join attribute — every pair with
same value on join attribute must be matched
3. Detailed algorithm in book

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.27 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Example
Students Table
Student_ID Name Course_ID
1 Alice 101 SELECT Students.Student_ID, Students.Name, Courses.Course_Name
2 Bob 102 FROM Students
3 Eve 103 JOIN Courses ON Students.Course_ID = Courses.Course_ID;
4 John 104
1. Since both tables are sorted on Course_ID, the algorithm
Courses Table merges them like merging two sorted lists.
Course_ID Course_Name 2. Initialize pointers at the start of both tables.
101 Math 3. Compare Course_IDs in both tables.
102 Science 4. If they match, output the result.
103 History 5. If Students.Course_ID < Courses.Course_ID, move to the
105 Art next student.
6. If Students.Course_ID > Courses.Course_ID, move to the
next course. Repeat until one table is exhausted.

Student_ID Name Course_Name

1 Alice Math
2 Bob Science
3 Eve History

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.28 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Merge-Join (Cont.)
 Can be used only for equi-joins and natural joins
 Each block needs to be read only once (assuming all tuples for any given value of the join
attributes fit in memory
 Thus the cost of merge join is:
br + bs block transfers + br / bb + bs / bb seeks
 + the cost of sorting if relations are unsorted.
 hybrid merge-join: If one relation is sorted, and the other has a secondary B+-tree index
on the join attribute
 Merge the sorted relation with the leaf entries of the B+-tree .
 Sort the result on the addresses of the unsorted relation’s tuples
 Scan the unsorted relation in physical address order and merge with previous result, to
replace addresses by the actual tuples
 Sequential scan more efficient than random lookup

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.29 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Complex Joins
 Join with a conjunctive condition:

r 1  2...   n s
 Either use nested loops/block nested loops, or
 Compute the result of one of the simpler joins r i s
 final result comprises those tuples in the intermediate result
that satisfy the remaining conditions
1  . . .  i –1  i +1  . . .  n
 Join with a disjunctive condition

r 1  2 ...  n s
 Either use nested loops/block nested loops, or
 Compute as the union of the records in individual joins r  i s:
(r 1 s)  (r 2 s)  . . .  (r n s)

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.30 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Other Operations
 Duplicate elimination can be implemented via hashing or sorting.
 On sorting duplicates will come adjacent to each other, and all but one
set of duplicates can be deleted.
 Optimization: duplicates can be deleted during run generation as well
as at intermediate merge steps in external sort-merge.
 Hashing is similar – duplicates will come into the same bucket.
 Projection:
 perform projection on each tuple
 followed by duplicate elimination.

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.31 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Evaluation of Expressions
 So far: we have seen algorithms for individual operations
 Alternatives for evaluating an entire expression tree
 Materialization: generate results of an expression whose inputs are relations or
are already computed, materialize (store) it on disk. Repeat.
 Pipelining: pass on tuples to parent operations even as an operation is being
executed
 We study the above alternatives in more detail

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.32 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Materialization
 Materialized evaluation: evaluate one operation at a time, starting at the lowest-level.
Use intermediate results materialized into temporary relations to evaluate next-level
operations.
 E.g., in figure below, compute and store

 building "Watson " (department )

then compute the store its join with instructor, and finally compute the projection on
name.

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.33 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Materialization (Cont.)
 Materialized evaluation is always applicable
 Cost of writing results to disk and reading them back can be quite high
 Our cost formulas for operations ignore cost of writing results to disk, so
 Overall cost = Sum of costs of individual operations +
cost of writing intermediate results to disk
 Double buffering: use two output buffers for each operation, when one is full write it
to disk while the other is getting filled
 Allows overlap of disk writes with computation and reduces execution time

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.34 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Pipelining
 Pipelined evaluation : evaluate several operations simultaneously, passing
the results of one operation on to the next.
 E.g., in previous expression tree, don’t store result of

 building "Watson " (department )

 instead, pass tuples directly to the join.. Similarly, don’t store result of join,
pass tuples directly to projection.
 Much cheaper than materialization: no need to store a temporary relation to
disk.
 Pipelining may not always be possible – e.g., sort, hash-join.
 For pipelining to be effective, use evaluation algorithms that generate output
tuples even as tuples are received for inputs to the operation.
 Pipelines can be executed in two ways: demand driven and producer
driven

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.35 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Pipelining (Cont.)
 In demand driven or lazy evaluation
 system repeatedly requests next tuple from top level operation
 Each operation requests next tuple from children operations as required, in order to output its
next tuple
 In between calls, operation has to maintain “state” so it knows what to return next
 In producer-driven or eager pipelining
 Operators produce tuples eagerly and pass them up to their parents
 Buffer maintained between operators, child puts tuples in buffer, parent removes tuples from
buffer
 if buffer is full, child waits till there is space in the buffer, and then generates more tuples
 System schedules operations that have space in output buffer and can process more input
tuples
 Alternative name: pull and push models of pipelining

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.36 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 Pipelining (Cont.)
 Implementation of demand-driven pipelining
 Each operation is implemented as an iterator implementing the following
operations
 open()
– E.g. file scan: initialize file scan
» state: pointer to beginning of file
– E.g.merge join: sort relations;
» state: pointers to beginning of sorted relations
 next()
– E.g. for file scan: Output next tuple, and advance and store file pointer
– E.g. for merge join: continue with merge from earlier state till
next output tuple is found. Save pointers as iterator state.
 close()

Database System Concepts - 6th Edition 12.37 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
 End of Chapter

Database System Concepts, 6th Ed.

©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
See www.db-book.com for conditions on re-use