CoSc 265

Fundamental of Database management

System

Instructor : Welde Janfa

 CHAPTER 4
Functional Dependencies and

Normalization
Chapter Outline
1. Informal Design Guidelines for Relational Databases
◦ 1.1 Semantics of the Relation Attributes
◦ 1.2 Redundant Information in Tuples and Update Anomalies
◦ 1.3 Null Values in Tuples
◦ 1.4 Spurious Tuples
2. Functional Dependencies (FDs)
◦ 2.1 Definition of Functional Dependency
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
4. General Normal Form Definitions for 2NF and 3NF (For
Multiple Candidate Keys)
3
1. Informal Design Guidelines for Relational Databases

What is relational database design?

◦ The grouping of attributes to form "good"
relation schemes
 Two levels of relation sachems
◦ 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?
4
Informal Design Guidelines for Relational Databases

 We first discuss informal guidelines for good relational

design
◦ Making sure that the semantics of the attributes is clear in
the schema
◦ Reducing the redundant information in tuples
◦ Reducing the NULL values in tuples
◦ Disallowing the possibility of generating spurious tuples
 Then we discuss formal concepts of functional dependencies
and normal forms
◦ -1NF (First Normal Form)
◦ 2NF (Second Normal Form)
◦ 3NF (Third Normal Form)
◦ BCNF (Boyce-Codd Normal Form)

5
1.1Semantics 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.

6
A simplified COMPANY relational database schema

Figure 14.1 A simplified COMPANY relational database schema.

7
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

8
EXAMPLE OF AN UPDATE ANOMALY
Consider the relation:
◦ EMP_PROJ(Emp#, Proj#, Ename, Pname,
No_hours)
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.

9
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 he/she is
assigned to a project.

10
EXAMPLE OF A DELETE ANOMALY
Consider the relation:
◦ EMP_PROJ(Emp#, Proj#, Ename, Pname,
No_hours)
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.

11
Two relation schemas suffering from update anomalies

Figure 14.3
Two relation schemas
suffering from update
anomalies. (a)
EMP_DEPT and (b)
EMP_PROJ.

12
Sample states for EMP_DEPT and EMP_PROJ

Figure 14.4
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.
13
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.

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

15
Generation of Spurious Tuples – avoid at any cost
◦ 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.

16
Spurious Tuples
 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.
 Guideline 4. Design relation schemas so that they can be
joined with equality conditions on attributes that are
appropriately related (primary key, foreign key) pairs in a
way that guarantees that no spurious tuples are generated.
Avoid relations that contain matching attributes that are
not (foreign key, primary key) combinations because
joining on such attributes may produce spurious tuples.
17
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

18
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]=t2[X], then t1[Y]=t2[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

19
Examples of FD constraints (1)
Employee number determines employee
name
◦ ENO  ENAME
Project number determines project name and
location
◦ PNUMBER  {PNAME, PLOCATION}
Employee number and project number
determines the hours per week that the
employee works on the project
◦ {ENO, PNUMBER}  HOURS

20
Examples of FD constraints (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])

21
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.

22
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.

23
What FDs may exist?
A relation R(A, B, C, D) with its
extension.
Which FDs may exist in this
relation?

24
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

25
3.1 Normalization of Relations (1)
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

26
Normalization of Relations (2)
1NF, 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)
27
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
of
1. Minimizing redundancy
2. Avoiding update anomalies
 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

28
3.3Definitions of Keys and Attributes Participating in
Keys (1)
A superkey of a relation schema R = {A1,
A2, ...., An} is 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] = t2[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.

29
Definitions of Keys and Attributes Participating in Keys
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.

30
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

31
3.4 First Normal Form
There are three main techniques to achieve
first normal form for such a relation:
1. Remove the multi-valued attribute that violates 1NF and
place it in a separate relation schema along with the
primary key relation.
2. Expand the key so that there will be a separate tuple in
the original relation so that the expanded key will avoid
set of value.
3. If a maximum number of values is known for the
attribute as n, replace the attribute by n atomic
attributes.

32
3.4 Normalization into 1NF

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.
33
3.4 Normalizing nested relations into 1NF

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.
34
3.5 Second Normal Form (1)
 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:
◦ {ENO, PNUMBER} -> HOURS is a full FD since neither ENO
-> HOURS nor PNUMBER -> HOURS hold
◦ {ENO, PNUMBER} -> ENAME is not a full FD (it is called a
partial dependency ) since ENO -> ENAME also holds

35
Second Normal Form (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”

36
Normalization into 2NF and 3NF

Figure 14.11
Normalizing into 2NF and 3NF. (a) Normalizing EMP_PROJ into 2NF relations. (b) Normalizing EMP_DEPT into
3NF relations.
37
Normalizing into 2NF and 3NF

Figure 14.11
Normalizing into 2NF and 3NF. (a) Normalizing EMP_PROJ into 2NF relations. (b) Normalizing EMP_DEPT into
3NF relations.
38
3.6 Third Normal Form (1)
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 ->
DMGRSSN hold
◦ SSN -> ENAME is non-transitive
 Since there is no set of attributes X where SSN -> X and
X -> ENAME

39
Third Normal Form (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.

40
Summary of Normal Forms

41
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

42
4. General Normal Form Definitions (For Multiple Keys) (1)

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.

43
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)

44
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).
45
4.3 Interpreting the General Definition of Third Normal Form

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.

46
4.3 Interpreting the General Definition of Third Normal Form

 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.

47
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)

48
Boyce-Codd normal form

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.

49
A relation TEACH that is in 3NF but not in BCNF

Figure 14.14
A relation TEACH that is in 3NF but not
BCNF.

50
Achieving the BCNF by Decomposition (1)
 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)

51
Achieving the BCNF by Decomposition (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.

52
Test for checking non-additivity of Binary Relational
Decompositions
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)) is in F+, or
 The f.d. ((R1 ∩ R2)  (R2 - R1)) is in F+.

53
Test for checking non-additivity of Binary Relational
Decompositions
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.

54
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 (ii) X υ A.
If either R –A or X υ 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 υ Course), which gives
the relations: (Instructor, Student) and (Instructor, Course) that we
obtained before in decomposition D3.

55
5. Multivalued Dependencies and Fourth Normal Form (1)
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] = t2[X], then two tuples t3 and t4 should also exist
in r with the following properties, where we use Z to
denote (R 2 (X υ Y)):
◦ t3[X] = t4[X] = t1[X] = t2[X].

◦ t3[Y] = t1[Y] and t4[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) 56
Multivalued Dependencies and Fourth Normal Form (3)

Definition:
 A relation schema R is in 4NF with respect to a set of
dependencies F (that includes functional dependencies
and multivalued dependencies) if, for every nontrivial
multivalued dependency X —>> 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.

57
Fourth and fifth normal forms.

Figure 14.15
Fourth and fifth normal forms. (a) The EMP relation with two MVDs: Ename –>> Pname and Ename –>>
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.

57
6. Join Dependencies and Fifth Normal Form (1)

Definition:
 A join dependency (JD), denoted by JD(R , R , ..., R ),
1 2 n
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 R 1, R2, ..., Rn;
that is, for every such r we have
◦ * (R1(r), R2(r), ..., 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.

59
Join Dependencies and Fifth Normal Form (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(R 1, 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.
60
Chapter Summary
InformalDesign 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

61
End of Chapter Four
Thank You

62