Chapter 12: Indexing and Hashing

● Basic Concepts
● Ordered Indices
● B+-Tree Index Files
● B-Tree Index Files
● Static Hashing
● Dynamic Hashing
● Comparison of Ordered Indexing and Hashing
● Index Definition in SQL
● Multiple-Key Access

Database System 12.2 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

The Memory Hierarchy
Intel PIII CPU Die
CPU: 450MHz
Memory: 512MB CPU

Registers

L1 Cache
40 ns

L2 Cache
90 ns

Main Memory
14 ms = 14000000 ns

Cost is affected significantly

by disk accesses ! Hard Disk
3

Database System 12.3 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

The Hard (Magnetic) disk

Database System 12.4 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

The Hard (Magnetic) disk

A block is a contiguous sequence of sectors from a

single track of one platter. Block sizes range from 512
bytes to several kilobytes. Data are transferred between
disk and main memory in units of blocks.

Reference: 11.2.3 Optimization of Disk-Block Access

(Silberschatz−Korth−Sudarshan:
Database System Concepts, Fourth Edition)

Database System 12.5 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Basic Concepts
● Indexing mechanisms used to speed up access to desired
data.
E.g., author catalog in library
● Search Key - attribute to set of attributes used to look up
records in a file.
● An index file consists of records (called index entries) of the
form search-key pointer

● Index files are typically much smaller than the original file
● Two basic kinds of indices:
Ordered indices: search keys are stored in sorted order
Hash indices: search keys are distributed uniformly across
“buckets” using a “hash function”.

Database System 12.6 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Index Evaluation Metrics
● Access types supported efficiently. E.g.,
records with a specified value in the attribute
or records with an attribute value falling in a specified range of
values.
● Access time: The time it takes to find a particular data item, or
set of items, using the technique in question.
● Insertion time: The time it takes to insert a new data item. This
value includes the time it takes to find the correct place to insert
the new data item, as well as the time it takes to update the
index structure.
● Deletion time: The time it takes to delete a data item. This value
includes the time it takes to find the item to be deleted, as well
as the time it takes to update the index structure.
● Space overhead: The additional space occupied by an index
structure. Provided that the amount of additional space is
moderate, it is usually worthwhile to sacrifice the space to
achieve improved performance.
Database System 12.7 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
Ordered Indices
Indexing techniques evaluated on basis of:
● In an ordered index, index entries are stored sorted on the
search key value. E.g., author catalog in library.
● Primary index: in a sequentially ordered file, the index whose
search key specifies the sequential order of the file.
Also called clustering index
The search key of a primary index is usually but not necessarily the
primary key.
● Secondary index: an index whose search key specifies an order
different from the sequential order of the file. Also called
non-clustering index.
● Index-sequential file: ordered sequential file with a primary
index.

Database System 12.8 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Dense Index Files

● Dense index — Index record appears for every search-key value

in the file.

Database System 12.9 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Sparse Index Files

● Sparse Index: contains index records for only some search-key

values.
Applicable when records are sequentially ordered on search-key
● To locate a record with search-key value K we:
Find index record with largest search-key value < K
Search file sequentially starting at the record to which the index
record points
● Less space and less maintenance overhead for insertions and
deletions.
● Generally slower than dense index for locating records.
● Good tradeoff: sparse index with an index entry for every block
in file, corresponding to least search-key value in the block.

Database System 12.10 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Example of Sparse Index Files

Database System 12.11 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Trade-off between Dense and Sparse
primary index
As we have seen, it is generally faster to locate a record if we have a
dense index rather than a sparse index. However, sparse indices have
advantages over dense indices in that they require less space and they
impose less maintenance overhead for insertions and deletions.
There is a trade-off that the system designer must make between access
time and space overhead. Although the decision regarding this trade-off
depends on the specific application, a good compromise is to have a
sparse index with one index entry per block.

The reason this design is a good trade-off is that the dominant cost in
processing a database request is the time that it takes to bring a block
from disk into main memory. Once we have brought in the block, the
time to scan the entire block is negligible.

Database System 12.12 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Multilevel Index

● If index does not fit in main memory, access becomes

expensive.
● To reduce number of disk accesses to index records, treat
primary index kept on disk as a sequential file and construct a
sparse index on it.
outer index – a sparse index of primary index
inner index – the primary index file
● If even outer index is too large to fit in main memory, yet another
level of index can be created, and so on.
● Indices at all levels must be updated on insertion or deletion
from the file.

Database System 12.13 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Multilevel Index (Cont.)

Database System 12.14 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Index Update: Deletion

Database System 12.15 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Index Update: Deletion

Database System 12.16 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Index Update: Insertion

Database System 12.17 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Secondary Indices

● Frequently, one wants to find all the records whose

values in a certain field (which is not the search-key of
the primary index) satisfy some condition.
Example 1: In the account database stored sequentially
by account number, we may want to find all accounts in
a particular branch
Example 2: as above, but where we want to find all
accounts with a specified balance or range of balances
● We can have a secondary index with an index record
for each search-key value; index record points to a
bucket that contains pointers to all the actual records
with that particular search-key value.

Database System 12.18 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Secondary Index on balance field of
account

Database System 12.19 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Primary and Secondary Indices

● Secondary indices have to be dense.

● Indices offer substantial benefits when searching for records.
● When a file is modified, every index on the file must be updated,
Updating indices imposes overhead on database modification.
● Sequential scan using primary index is efficient, but a sequential
scan using a secondary index is expensive
each record access may fetch a new block from disk

Database System 12.20 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

A sequential file

A sequential file is designed for efficient processing of

records in sorted order based on some search-key. A
search key is any attribute or set of attributes; it need
not be the primary key, or even a superkey. To permit
fast retrieval of records in search-key order, we chain
together records by pointers. The pointer in each record
points to the next record in search-key order.

Database System 12.21 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

A sequential file

Database System 12.22 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

A sequential file

Database System 12.23 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

A sequential file

For insertion, we apply the following rules:

1. Locate the record in the file that comes before the

record to be inserted in search-key order.

2. If there is a free record (that is, space left after a

deletion) within the same block as this record, insert the
new record there. Otherwise, insert the new record in an
overflow block. In either case, adjust the pointers so as to
chain together the records in search-key order.

Database System 12.24 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

B+-Tree Index Files

B+-tree indices are an alternative to indexed-sequential files.

● Disadvantage of indexed-sequential files: performance

degrades as file grows, since many overflow blocks get
created. Periodic reorganization of entire file is required.
● Advantage of B+-tree index files: automatically reorganizes
itself with small, local, changes, in the face of insertions and
deletions. Reorganization of entire file is not required to
maintain performance.
● Disadvantage of B+-trees: extra insertion and deletion
overhead, space overhead.
● Advantages of B+-trees outweigh disadvantages, and they are
used extensively.

Database System 12.25 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

B+-Tree Index Files (Cont.)

A B+-tree is a rooted tree satisfying the following properties:

● All paths from root to leaf are of the same length
● Each node that is not a root or a leaf has between [n/2] and
n children.
● Special cases:
If the root is not a leaf, it has at least 2 children.
If the root is a leaf (that is, there are no other nodes in the
tree), it can have between 0 and (n–1) values.

Database System 12.26 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

B+-Tree Node Structure

● Typical node

Ki are the search-key values

Pi are pointers to children (for non-leaf nodes) or pointers to records
or buckets of records (for leaf nodes).
● The search-keys in a node are ordered
K1 < K2 < K3 < . . . < Kn–1

Database System 12.27 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Leaf Nodes in B+-Trees
Properties of a leaf node:
● For i = 1, 2, . . ., n–1, pointer Pi either points to a file record with
search-key value Ki, or to a bucket of pointers to file records,
each record having search-key value Ki. Only need bucket
structure if search-key does not form a primary key.
● If Li, Lj are leaf nodes and i < j, Li’s search-key values are less
than Lj’s search-key values
● Pn points to next leaf node in search-key order

Database System 12.28 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Non-Leaf Nodes in B+-Trees

● Non leaf nodes form a multi-level sparse index on the leaf

nodes. For a non-leaf node with m pointers:
All the search-keys in the subtree to which P1 points are less than
K1
For 2 ≤ i ≤ n – 1, all the search-keys in the subtree to which Pi
points have values greater than or equal to Ki–1 and less than Km–1

Database System 12.29 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Example of a B+-tree

B+-tree for account file (n =

3)

Database System 12.30 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Example of B+-tree

B+-tree for account file (n =

5)

● Non-leaf nodes other than root must have between 3

and 5 children (⎡(n/2⎤ and n with n =5).
● Root must have at least 2 children.

Database System 12.31 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Observations about B+-trees

● Since the inter-node connections are done by pointers,

“logically” close blocks need not be “physically” close.
● The non-leaf levels of the B+-tree form a hierarchy of sparse
indices.
● The B+-tree contains a relatively small number of levels
(logarithmic in the size of the main file), thus searches can be
conducted efficiently.
● Insertions and deletions to the main file can be handled
efficiently, as the index can be restructured in logarithmic time.

Database System 12.32 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Queries on B+-Trees
● Find all records with a search-key value of k.
1. Start with the root node
1. Examine the node for the smallest search-key value > k.
2. If such a value exists, assume it is Kj. Then follow Pi to
the child node
3. Otherwise k ≥ Km–1, where there are m pointers in the
node. Then follow Pm to the child node.
2. If the node reached by following the pointer above is not a leaf
node, repeat the above procedure on the node, and follow the
corresponding pointer.
3. Eventually reach a leaf node. If for some i, key Ki = k follow
pointer Pi to the desired record or bucket. Else no record with
search-key value k exists.

Database System 12.33 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Queries on B+-Trees (Cont.)
● In processing a query, a path is traversed in the tree
from the root to some leaf node.
● If there are K search-key values in the file, the path is no
longer than ⎡ log⎡n/2⎤(K)⎤.
● A node is generally the same size as a disk block,
typically 4 kilobytes, and n is typically around 100 (40
bytes per index entry).
● With 1 million search key values and n = 100, at most
log50(1,000,000) = 4 nodes are accessed in a lookup.
● Contrast this with a balanced binary free with 1 million
search key values — around 20 nodes are accessed in a
lookup
above difference is significant since every node access
may need a disk I/O, costing around 20 milliseconds!

Database System 12.34 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Why B+-Tree Index?
● B+-tree structure imposes performance overhead on insertion
and deletion, and adds space overhead. The overhead is
acceptable even for frequently modified files, since the cost of
file reorganization is avoided. Furthermore, since nodes may
be as much as half empty (if they have the minimum number
of children), there is some wasted space. This space
overhead, too, is acceptable given the performance benefits
of the B+-tree structure.

Database System 12.35 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Why B+-Tree Index?

Database System 12.36 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Why B+-Tree Index?

Database System 12.37 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Updates on B+-Trees: Insertion

● Find the leaf node in which the search-key value would appear
● If the search-key value is already there in the leaf node, record is
added to file and if necessary a pointer is inserted into the
bucket.
● If the search-key value is not there, then add the record to the
main file and create a bucket if necessary. Then:
If there is room in the leaf node, insert (key-value, pointer) pair in the
leaf node
Otherwise, split the node (along with the new (key-value, pointer)
entry) as discussed in the next slide.

Database System 12.38 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Updates on B+-Trees: Insertion (Cont.)

● Splitting a node:
take the n(search-key value, pointer) pairs (including the one being
inserted) in sorted order. Place the first ⎡ n/2 ⎤ in the original node,
and the rest in a new node.
let the new node be p, and let k be the least key value in p. Insert
(k,p) in the parent of the node being split. If the parent is full, split it
and propagate the split further up.
● The splitting of nodes proceeds upwards till a node that is not
full is found. In the worst case the root node may be split
increasing the height of the tree by 1.

Result of splitting node containing Brighton and Downtown

on
inserting Clearview
Database System 12.39 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
Updates on B+-Trees: Insertion (Cont.)

B+-Tree before and after insertion of

“Clearview”
Database System 12.40 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
Updates on B+-Trees: Deletion

● Find the record to be deleted, and remove it from the

main file and from the bucket (if present)
● Remove (search-key value, pointer) from the leaf node
if there is no bucket or if the bucket has become
empty
● If the node has too few entries due to the removal, and
the entries in the node and a sibling fit into a single
node, then
Insert all the search-key values in the two nodes into a
single node (the one on the left), and delete the other
node.
Delete the pair (Ki–1, Pi), where Pi is the pointer to the
deleted node, from its parent, recursively using the
above procedure.

Database System 12.41 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Updates on B+-Trees: Deletion

● Otherwise, if the node has too few entries due to the removal,
and the entries in the node and a sibling fit into a single node,
then
Redistribute the pointers between the node and a sibling such that
both have more than the minimum number of entries.
Update the corresponding search-key value in the parent of the
node.
● The node deletions may cascade upwards till a node which has
⎡n/2 ⎤ or more pointers is found. If the root node has only one
pointer after deletion, it is deleted and the sole child becomes
the root.

Database System 12.42 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Examples of B+-Tree Deletion

Before and after deleting

“Downtown”
● The removal of the leaf node containing “Downtown” did not
result in its parent having too little pointers. So the
cascaded deletions stopped with the deleted leaf node’s
parent.
Database System 12.43 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
Examples of B+-Tree Deletion (Cont.)

Deletion of “Perryridge” from result of previous

example
● Node with “Perryridge” becomes underfull (actually empty, in this special case)
and merged with its sibling.
● As a result “Perryridge” node’s parent became underfull, and was merged with its
sibling (and an entry was deleted from their parent)
● Root node then had only one child, and was deleted and its child became the
new root node
Database System 12.44 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
Example of B+-tree Deletion (Cont.)

Before and after deletion of “Perryridge” from earlier example

● Parent of leaf containing Perryridge became underfull, and borrowed a
pointer from its left sibling
● Search-key value in the parent’s parent changes as a result
Database System 12.45 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
Problem of Index Sequential File

The main drawback of index-sequential file organization is the

degradation of performance as the file grows: With growth, an
increasing percentage of index records and actual records
become out of order, and are stored in overflow blocks.
We solve the degradation of index lookups by using B+-tree
indices on the file. We solve the degradation problem for storing
the actual records by using the leaf level of the B+-tree to
organize the blocks containing the actual records.

Database System 12.46 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

B+-Tree File Organization

● Index file degradation problem is solved by using B+-Tree

indices. Data file degradation problem is solved by using
B+-Tree File Organization.
● The leaf nodes in a B+-tree file organization store records,
instead of pointers.
● Since records are larger than pointers, the maximum
number of records that can be stored in a leaf node is less
than the number of pointers in a nonleaf node.
● Leaf nodes are still required to be at least half full.
● Insertion and deletion are handled in the same way as
insertion and deletion of entries in a B+-tree index.

Database System 12.47 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

B+-Tree File Organization (Cont.)

Example of B+-tree File Organization

● Good space utilization important since records use more space than
pointers.
● To improve space utilization, involve more sibling nodes in redistribution
during splits and merges
Involving 2 siblings in redistribution (to avoid split / merge where possible)
results in each node having at least entries

Database System 12.48 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

B+-Tree File Organization (Cont.)

Database System 12.49 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

B-Tree Index Files
● Similar to B+-tree, but B-tree allows search-key values to
appear only once; eliminates redundant storage of search
keys.
● Search keys in nonleaf nodes appear nowhere else in the
B-tree; an additional pointer field for each search key in a
nonleaf node must be included.
● Generalized B-tree leaf node

● Nonleaf node – pointers Bi are the bucket or file record

pointers.

Database System 12.50 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

B-Tree Index File Example

B-tree (above) and B+-tree (below) on same data

Database System 12.51 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

B-Tree Index Files (Cont.)
● Advantages of B-Tree indices:
May use less tree nodes than a corresponding B+-Tree.
Sometimes possible to find search-key value before reaching leaf
node.
● Disadvantages of B-Tree indices:
Only small fraction of all search-key values are found early
Non-leaf nodes are larger, so fan-out is reduced. Thus, B-Trees
typically have greater depth than corresponding B+-Tree
Insertion and deletion more complicated than in B+-Trees
Implementation is harder than B+-Trees.
● Typically, advantages of B-Trees do not outweigh disadvantages.

Database System 12.52 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Static Hashing

● It can be used for two different purposes.

Hash File Organization
The address of the disk block containing the actual
record is obtained by using the hash function on a
search key.

Hash Index Organization

The search keys along with their pointers to actual
records is organized in a hash file structure.

Database System 12.53 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Static Hashing

● A bucket is a unit of storage containing one or more records

(a bucket is typically a disk block but could be larger or
smaller than a disk block).
● In a hash file organization we obtain the bucket of a record
directly from its search-key value using a hash function.
● Hash function h is a function from the set of all search-key
values K to the set of all bucket addresses B.
● Hash function is used to locate records for access, insertion
as well as deletion.
● Records with different search-key values may be mapped to
the same bucket; thus entire bucket has to be searched
sequentially to locate a record.

Database System 12.54 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Example of Hash File Organization (Cont.)

Hash file organization of account file, using branch-name as key

● There are 10 buckets,

● The binary representation of the ith character is assumed to
be the integer i. e.g. A=>1
● The hash function returns the sum of the binary
representations of the characters modulo 10
E.g. h(Perryridge) = 5 h(Round Hill) = 3 h(Brighton) = 3

Database System 12.55 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Database System 12.56 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
Example of Hash File Organization
Hash file organization of account file, using branch-name as key

Database System 12.57 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Hash Functions
● Worst hash function maps all search-key values to the same
bucket; this makes access time proportional to the number of
search-key values in the file.
● An ideal hash function is uniform, i.e., each bucket is assigned
the same number of search-key values from the set of all
possible values.
● Ideal hash function is random, so each bucket will have nearly
the same number of records assigned to it irrespective of the
actual distribution of search-key values in the file.
● Typical hash functions perform computation on the internal
binary representation of the search-key.
For example, for a string search-key, the binary representations of
all the characters in the string could be added and the sum modulo
the number of buckets could be returned. .

Database System 12.58 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Handling of Bucket Overflows
● Bucket overflow can occur because of
Insufficient buckets
Skew in distribution of records. This can occur due to two
reasons:
★ multiple records have same search-key value
★ chosen hash function produces non-uniform distribution of
key values
● Although the probability of bucket overflow can be reduced by
choosing the number of buckets to be (nr/fr)*(1+d) where d is
around 0.2,
it cannot be eliminated; it is handled by using overflow
buckets.

Database System 12.59 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Handling of Bucket Overflows (Cont.)
● Overflow chaining – the overflow buckets of a given bucket are
chained together in a linked list.
● Above scheme is called closed hashing.
An alternative, called open hashing, which does not use overflow
buckets, is not suitable for database applications.

Database System 12.60 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Hash Indices

● Hashing can be used not only for file organization, but also for
index-structure creation.
● A hash index organizes the search keys, with their associated
record pointers, into a hash file structure.
● Strictly speaking, hash indices are always secondary hash
indices
if the file itself is organized using hashing, a separate hash index on
it using the same search-key is unnecessary.
We use the term hash index to refer to both secondary hash indices
and hash organized file .

Database System 12.61 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Example of Hash Index

Database System 12.62 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Deficiencies of Static Hashing
● In static hashing, function h maps search-key values to a fixed
set of B of bucket addresses.
Databases grow with time. If initial number of buckets is too small,
performance will degrade due to too much overflows.
If file size at some point in the future is anticipated and number of
buckets allocated accordingly, significant amount of space will be
wasted initially.
If database shrinks, again space will be wasted.
One option is periodic re-organization of the file with a new hash
function, but it is very expensive.
● These problems can be avoided by using techniques that allow
the number of buckets to be modified dynamically.

Database System 12.63 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Dynamic Hashing
● Good for database that grows and shrinks in size
● Allows the hash function to be modified dynamically
● Extendable hashing – one form of dynamic hashing
Hash function generates values over a large range — typically b-bit
integers, with b = 32.
At any time use only a prefix of the hash function to index into a
table of bucket addresses.
Let the length of the prefix be i bits, 0 ≤ i ≤ 32.
Bucket address table size = 2i. Initially i = 0
Value of i grows and shrinks as the size of the database grows and
shrinks.
Multiple entries in the bucket address table may point to a bucket.
Thus, actual number of buckets is < 2i
★ The number of buckets also changes dynamically due to
coalescing and splitting of buckets.

Database System 12.64 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

General Extendable Hash Structure

In this structure, i2 = i3 = i, whereas i1 = i – 1 (see

next slide for details)

Database System 12.65 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Use of Extendable Hash Structure
● Each bucket j stores a value ij; all the entries that point to the
same bucket have the same values on the first ij bits.
● To locate the bucket containing search-key Kj:
1. Compute h(Kj) = X
2. Use the first i high order bits of X as a displacement into bucket
address table, and follow the pointer to appropriate bucket
● To insert a record with search-key value Kj
follow same procedure as look-up and locate the bucket, say j.
If there is room in the bucket j insert record in the bucket.
Else the bucket must be split and insertion re-attempted (next slide.)
★ Overflow buckets used instead in some cases (will see shortly)

Database System 12.66 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Updates in Extendable Hash Structure
To split a bucket j when inserting record with search-key value
K j:
● If i > ij (more than one pointer to bucket j)
allocate a new bucket z, and set ij and iz to the old ij -+ 1.
make the second half of the bucket address table entries pointing
to j to point to z
remove and reinsert each record in bucket j.
recompute new bucket for Kj and insert record in the bucket
(further splitting is required if the bucket is still full)
● If i = ij (only one pointer to bucket j)
increment i and double the size of the bucket address table.
replace each entry in the table by two entries that point to the
same bucket.
recompute new bucket address table entry for Kj
Now i > ij so use the first case above.

Database System 12.67 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Updates in Extendable Hash Structure
(Cont.)
● When inserting a value, if the bucket is full after several splits
(that is, i reaches some limit b) create an overflow bucket instead
of splitting bucket entry table further.
● To delete a key value,
locate it in its bucket and remove it.
The bucket itself can be removed if it becomes empty (with
appropriate updates to the bucket address table).
Coalescing of buckets can be done (can coalesce only with a
“buddy” bucket having same value of ij and same i –1 prefix, if it is
j
present)
Decreasing bucket address table size is also possible
★ Note: decreasing bucket address table size is an expensive
operation and should be done only if number of buckets
becomes much smaller than the size of the table

Database System 12.68 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Use of Extendable Hash Structure:
Example

Initial Hash structure, bucket size =

2
Database System 12.69 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan
Example (Cont.)

● Hash structure after insertion of one Brighton and two

Downtown records

Database System 12.70 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Example (Cont.)
Hash structure after insertion of Mianus
record

Database System 12.71 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Example (Cont.)

Hash structure after insertion of three Perryridge

records

Database System 12.72 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Example (Cont.)

● Hash structure after insertion of Redwood and Round Hill

records

Database System 12.73 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Extendable Hashing vs. Other Schemes

● Benefits of extendable hashing:

Hash performance does not degrade with growth of file
Minimal space overhead
● Disadvantages of extendable hashing
Extra level of indirection to find desired record
Bucket address table may itself become very big (larger than
memory)
★ Need a tree structure to locate desired record in the structure!
Changing size of bucket address table is an expensive operation
● Linear hashing is an alternative mechanism which avoids these
disadvantages at the possible cost of more bucket overflows

Database System 12.74 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Comparison of Ordered Indexing and Hashing

● Cost of periodic re-organization

● Relative frequency of insertions and deletions
● Is it desirable to optimize average access time at the expense of
worst-case access time?
● Expected type of queries:
Hashing is generally better at retrieving records having a specified
value of the key.
If range queries are common, ordered indices are to be preferred

Database System 12.75 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Index Definition in SQL

● Create an index
create index <index-name> on <relation-name>
(<attribute-list>)
E.g.: create index b-index on branch(branch-name)
● Use create unique index to indirectly specify and enforce the
condition that the search key is a candidate key is a candidate
key.
Not really required if SQL unique integrity constraint is supported
● To drop an index
drop index <index-name>

Database System 12.76 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Multiple-Key Access
● Use multiple indices for certain types of queries.
● Example:
select account-number
from account
where branch-name = “Perryridge” and balance = 1000
● Possible strategies for processing query using indices on
single attributes:
1. Use index on branch-name to find accounts with balances of
$1000; test branch-name = “Perryridge”.
2. Use index on balance to find accounts with balances of $1000;
test branch-name = “Perryridge”.
3. Use branch-name index to find pointers to all records pertaining
to the Perryridge branch. Similarly use index on balance. Take
intersection of both sets of pointers obtained.

Database System 12.77 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Indices on Multiple Attributes
Suppose we have an index on combined
search-key
(branch-name, balance).
● With the where clause
where branch-name = “Perryridge” and balance = 1000
the index on the combined search-key will fetch only records
that satisfy both conditions.
Using separate indices in less efficient — we may fetch many
records (or pointers) that satisfy only one of the conditions.
● Can also efficiently handle
where branch-name = “Perryridge” and balance < 1000
● But cannot efficiently handle
where branch-name < “Perryridge” and balance = 1000
May fetch many records that satisfy the first but not the
second condition.

Database System 12.78 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Grid Files
● Structure used to speed the processing of general multiple
search-key queries involving one or more comparison
operators.
● The grid file has a single grid array and one linear scale for
each search-key attribute. The grid array has number of
dimensions equal to number of search-key attributes.
● Multiple cells of grid array can point to same bucket
● To find the bucket for a search-key value, locate the row and
column of its cell using the linear scales and follow pointer

Database System 12.79 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Example Grid File for account

Database System 12.80 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Queries on a Grid File

● A grid file on two attributes A and B can handle queries of all

following forms with reasonable efficiency
(a1 ≤ A ≤ a2)
(b1 ≤ B ≤ b2)
(a1 ≤ A ≤ a2 ∧ b1 ≤ B ≤ b2),.
● E.g., to answer (a1 ≤ A ≤ a2 ∧ b1 ≤ B ≤ b2), use linear scales to
find corresponding candidate grid array cells, and look up all the
buckets pointed to from those cells.

Database System 12.81 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Grid Files (Cont.)
● During insertion, if a bucket becomes full, new bucket can be
created if more than one cell points to it.
Idea similar to extendable hashing, but on multiple dimensions
If only one cell points to it, either an overflow bucket must be
created or the grid size must be increased
● Linear scales must be chosen to uniformly distribute records
across cells.
Otherwise there will be too many overflow buckets.
● Periodic re-organization to increase grid size will help.
But reorganization can be very expensive.
● Space overhead of grid array can be high.
● R-trees (Chapter 23) are an alternative

Database System 12.82 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Bitmap Indices

● Bitmap indices are a special type of index designed for efficient

querying on multiple keys
● Records in a relation are assumed to be numbered sequentially
from, say, 0
Given a number n it must be easy to retrieve record n
★ Particularly easy if records are of fixed size
● Applicable on attributes that take on a relatively small number of
distinct values
E.g. gender, country, state, …
E.g. income-level (income broken up into a small number of levels
such as 0-9999, 10000-19999, 20000-50000, 50000- infinity)
● A bitmap is simply an array of bits

Database System 12.83 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Bitmap Indices (Cont.)

● In its simplest form a bitmap index on an attribute has a bitmap

for each value of the attribute
Bitmap has as many bits as records
In a bitmap for value v, the bit for a record is 1 if the record has the
value v for the attribute, and is 0 otherwise

Database System 12.84 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Bitmap Indices (Cont.)

● Bitmap indices are useful for queries on multiple attributes

not particularly useful for single attribute queries
● Queries are answered using bitmap operations
Intersection (and)
Union (or)
Complementation (not)
● Each operation takes two bitmaps of the same size and applies
the operation on corresponding bits to get the result bitmap
E.g. 100110 AND 110011 = 100010
100110 OR 110011 = 110111
NOT 100110 = 011001
Males with income level L1: 10010 AND 10100 = 10000
★ Can then retrieve required tuples.
★ Counting number of matching tuples is even faster

Database System 12.85 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Bitmap Indices (Cont.)

● Bitmap indices generally very small compared with relation size

E.g. if record is 100 bytes, space for a single bitmap is 1/800 of space
used by relation.
★ If number of distinct attribute values is 8, bitmap is only 1% of
relation size
● Deletion needs to be handled properly
Existence bitmap to note if there is a valid record at a record location
Needed for complementation
★ not(A=v): (NOT bitmap-A-v) AND ExistenceBitmap
● Should keep bitmaps for all values, even null value
To correctly handle SQL null semantics for NOT(A=v):
★ intersect above result with (NOT bitmap-A-Null)

Database System 12.86 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

Efficient Implementation of Bitmap Operations

● Bitmaps are packed into words; a single word and (a basic CPU
instruction) computes and of 32 or 64 bits at once
E.g. 1-million-bit maps can be anded with just 31,250 instruction
● Counting number of 1s can be done fast by a trick:
Use each byte to index into a precomputed array of 256 elements
each storing the count of 1s in the binary representation
★ Can use pairs of bytes to speed up further at a higher memory
cost
Add up the retrieved counts
● Bitmaps can be used instead of Tuple-ID lists at leaf levels of
B+-trees, for values that have a large number of matching
records
Worthwhile if > 1/64 of the records have that value, assuming a
tuple-id is 64 bits
Above technique merges benefits of bitmap and B+-tree indices

Database System 12.87 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan

End of Chapter
Partitioned Hashing
● Hash values are split into segments that depend on each
attribute of the search-key.
(A1, A2, . . . , An) for n attribute search-key
● Example: n = 2, for customer, search-key being
(customer-street, customer-city)
search-key value hash value
(Main, Harrison) 101 111
(Main, Brooklyn) 101 001
(Park, Palo Alto) 010 010
(Spring, Brooklyn) 001 001
(Alma, Palo Alto) 110 010
● To answer equality query on single attribute, need to look
up multiple buckets. Similar in effect to grid files.

Database System 12.89 ©Silberschatz, Korth and Sudarshan