bcnf分解算法_BCNF分解算法的解释

I looked in Decomposing a relation into BCNF answers and tried it on my homework, but i don't get the correct answers, so i ask for help in BCNF decomposition

Consider R=(ABCDEG) & F={BG->CD, G->A, CD->AE, C->AG, A->D}.

I start pick A->D.

Now i got S=(AD), R'=(ABCEG).

I pick G->A.

Now i got S=(AD,AG) R'=(BCEG).

I pick C->G.

Now i think i need to get S=(AD,AG,CG) and R'=(BCE), But the answer in the end is (AD,AG,CGE,BC) .what went wrong? or perhaps, a better algorithm?

解决方案

To convert a relation R and a set of functional dependencies(FD's) into 3NF you can use Bernstein's Synthesis. To apply Bernstein's Synthesis -

First we make sure the given set of FD's is a minimal cover

Second we take each FD and make it its own sub-schema.

Third we try to combine those sub-schemas

For example in your case:

R = {A,B,C,D,E,G}

FD's = {BG->CD,G->A,CD->AE,C->AG,A->D}

First we check whether the FD's is a minimal cover (singleton right-hand side , no extraneous left-hand side attribute, no redundant FD)

Singleton RHS: So we can write our FD's as { BG->C, BG->D, G->A, CD->A, CD->E, C->A, C->G, A->D}.

No extraneous LHS attribute: We can remove D from LHS of CD->A and CD->E since D is an extraneous attribute here (As we can get D from C since C->A and A->D). So we now have {BG->C, BG->D, G->A, C->A, C->E, C->G, A->D}

No redundant FD's: We note that there are a lot of redundant dependencies here. Removing them we have {BG->C, G->A, C->E, C->G, A->D}

Second we make each FD its own sub-schema. So now we have - (the keys for each relation are in bold)

R1={B,G,C}

R2={G,A}

R3={C,E}

R4={C,G}

R5={A,D}

Third we see if any of the sub-schemas can be combined. We see that R3 and R4 can be combined as they have the same key. So now we have -

S1 = {B,G,C}

S2 = {A,G}

S3 = {C,E,G}

S4 = {A,D}

This is in 3NF. Now to check for BCNF we check if any of these relations (S1,S2,S3,S4) violate the conditions of BCNF (i.e. for every functional dependency X->Y the left hand side (X) has to be a superkey) . In this case none of these violate BCNF and hence it is also decomposed to BCNF.

Note My final answer above is (AD,AG,CGE,BCG). The solution you expect is (AD,AG,CGE,BC) but that's wrong. The last relation here (S1) should also have the G attribute as shown above.