Query processing device and query processing method

Abstract

To provide a query processing device capable of reducing calculation cost to confirm whether or not a query compiles with constraints.SOLUTION: A query division part 3 generates a plurality of sub-queries obtained by dividing an input query for each organization. A score calculation part 7 calculates an organization score obtained by evaluating an organization-based risk being a risk determined that a sub-query does not comply with an organization rule of an organization corresponding to the sub-query on the basis of history information on a determination result obtained by determining whether the input query complies with the organization rule of each organization. A sub-query control part 9 sequentially transmits the sub-query to rule confirmation devices 200 according to a transmission order corresponding to the organization score, and sequentially receives response information to the sub-query from the rule confirmation devices 200. A comprehensive determination part 11 determines whether or not the input query complies with constraints by using the response information.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 1

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present disclosure relates to a query processing device and a query processing method. [Background technology]

[0002] Data collection techniques that collect and analyze various data are important for understanding the current situation and predicting the future, and are used for data-driven decision-making, etc. However, in order to use data, it is necessary to comply with the constraints imposed on that data.

[0003] Patent Document 1 discloses a technique for determining whether or not a query stored in a database complies with constraints imposed on the data when the query is operated on the data in response to the query. This technique estimates statistical information, such as the k value of data generated by the operation in response to the query, from the original data in the database, and determines whether or not the data complies with the constraints based on the statistical information. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0004] [Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent Publication No. 2022-137857 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0005] When a federated query, which can treat external databases managed by multiple organizations as if they were internal databases, is used as a query for manipulating data, there is a problem in that the technique described in Patent Document 1 cannot be applied because the method of estimating statistical information on data may not be able to deal with constraints individually defined by each organization.

[0006] In this case, it is necessary to inquire of each organization whether the query complies with the constraints individually defined by each organization, which results in the problem of using the computational resources of all organizations and increasing the computational cost for determining whether the query complies with the constraints.

[0007] The object of the present disclosure is to provide a query processing device and a method for determining whether a query complies with a constraint, the method comprising: Query Processing The purpose is to provide a method. [Means for solving the problem]

[0008] A query processing device according to one aspect of the present disclosure is a query processing device that determines whether an input query requesting operations on multiple data managed by each of multiple organizations complies with constraints imposed on the data, and includes: a division unit that generates multiple sub-queries by dividing the input query for each organization; a calculation unit that calculates, for each organization, an organization score that evaluates an organization-specific risk, which is the risk that the sub-query will be determined to not comply with the organization rule of the organization corresponding to the sub-query, based on historical information regarding judgment results for each organization in which it was determined whether the input query complies with the organization rule, which is the constraint for each organization; a sub-query control unit that transmits the sub-queries to a confirmation device that confirms whether the sub-query complies with the organization rule of the organization corresponding to the sub-query in order according to a transmission order corresponding to the organization score, and receives response information to the sub-queries from the confirmation device in order; and a determination unit that uses the response information to determine whether the input query complies with the constraint. [Effects of the Invention]

[0009] According to the present invention, it is possible to reduce the computational cost of checking whether a query complies with constraints. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0010] [Figure 1]FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating a configuration of a query processing device according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. [Figure 2] 1 is a flowchart illustrating the overall processing of a query processing device according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. [Figure 3] 10 is a flowchart illustrating an example of a country regulation determination process. [Figure 4] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of a policy setting screen. [Figure 5] 10 is a flowchart illustrating an example of an organizational rule determination process. [Figure 6] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of a subquery generation process. [Figure 7] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of a query score calculation process. [Figure 8] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of rank information. [Figure 9] 10 is a flowchart illustrating an example of a transmission method determination process. [Figure 10] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of a transmission order list. [Figure 11] FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating a hardware configuration of a query processing device according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0011] Hereinafter, embodiments of the present disclosure will be described with reference to the drawings.

[0012] FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating the configuration of a query processing device according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. The query processing device 100 illustrated in FIG. 1 is a device that performs a compliance check to determine whether an input query, which is a query requesting an operation on data, complies with the constraints (compliance) imposed on the data. The compliance check includes a country regulation check to determine whether the data complies with the regulations of the country in which the data is handled, and an organization rule check to determine whether the data complies with the organization rules stipulated by the organization that manages the data. The organization ,example For example, but not limited to, a hospital.

[0013] Specifically, the query processing device 100 has a country regulation determination unit 1, a country compliance status storage unit 2, a history storage unit 4, a non-compliance ratio calculation unit 5, a non-compliance determination time calculation unit 6, a query division unit 3, a score calculation unit 7, a score information storage unit 8, a subquery control unit 9, an organization-specific compliance status storage unit 10, an overall determination unit 11, and an overall compliance status storage unit 12.

[0014] The country restriction determination unit 1 performs a country restriction check to determine whether an input query complies with the country restriction of a target country. In this embodiment, the input query is a federated query that allows an external database managed by each organization to be treated as an internal database, but is not limited to this. The country restriction check is realized by a data flow check using a data flow policy that describes data that permits or prohibits data transfer within a country or between multiple countries. The target country is the country from which data is transferred and the country to which data is transferred. When data is transferred within a country, the country from which data is transferred and the country to which data is transferred are the same.

[0015] The country compliance status storage unit 2 stores country compliance status information indicating the determination result (i.e., whether or not the input query complies with the country regulation) by the country regulation determination unit 1. Here, the country compliance status information indicates "Compliant" if the input query complies with the country regulation, and indicates "Non-compliant" if the input query does not comply with the country regulation.

[0016] The query division unit 3, history storage unit 4, non-compliance ratio calculation unit 5, non-compliance determination time calculation unit 6, score calculation unit 7, score information storage unit 8, and subquery control unit 9 constitute a query control unit 50 that performs organizational rule checks to determine whether an input query complies with the organizational rules of each organization.

[0017] The query dividing unit 3 divides the input query into a plurality of sub-queries that request operations on the data of each organization.

[0018] The history storage unit 4, the non-compliance ratio calculation unit 5, the non-compliance determination time calculation unit 6, and the score calculation unit 7 constitute a calculation unit that calculates an organization score that evaluates the organization-specific risk, which is the risk that the subqueries divided by the query division unit 3 will be determined to not comply with the organization rules. The organization score is calculated for each organization.

[0019] The history storage unit 4 stores, for each organization that manages data, history information related to the results of organizational rule checks that determine whether a subquery requesting an operation on the organization's data complies with the organizational rules defined by that organization. The organizational rules include individual rules for each source data item that is the target of an operation requested by a subquery. In this embodiment, each piece of data in a database managed by an organization is table data, and the source data items are columns of that table data, but this example is not limiting.

[0020] The non-compliance rate calculation unit 5 calculates, for each organization, the rate at which subqueries corresponding to that organization are determined to not comply with the organization rules as the non-compliance rate, based on the history information stored in the history storage unit 4. More specifically, for each individual rule included in the organization rules, the non-compliance rate calculation unit 5 calculates the rate at which the subqueries are determined to not comply with the individual rule relative to the number of times that a column corresponding to the individual rule is the target of an operation by the subquery.

[0021] The non-compliance determination time calculation unit 6 calculates, for each organization, the time required for a subquery to be determined to be a non-compliant query that does not comply with the organizational rules, as the non-compliance determination time, based on the history information stored in the history storage unit 4. The non-compliance determination time is specifically a statistical value (for example, an average value) of the past required times. The non-compliance determination time differs, for example, depending on the type of database used by the organization. For example, if the organization is a hospital, the database may be an NDB (National Database Database). aIt depends on whether it is the KDB (Kokuho Data Base: National Health Insurance database) or the KDB (Kokuho Data Base: National Health Insurance database).

[0022] The score calculation unit 7 calculates an organization score for each organization that evaluates the organization-specific risk, which is the risk that the subquery generated by the query division unit 3 will be determined to not comply with the organization rules, based on the non-compliance rate for each organization calculated by the non-compliance rate calculation unit 5 and the non-compliance determination time for each organization calculated by the non-compliance determination time calculation unit 6. Furthermore, the score calculation unit 7 calculates a query score that evaluates the risk that the input query will be determined to not comply with the organization rules, based on the non-compliance rate for each organization calculated by the non-compliance rate calculation unit 5.

[0023] The score information storage unit 8 stores the query score and organization score calculated by the score calculation unit 7.

[0024] Subquery control unit 9 determines the transmission method of the subquery based on the query score stored in score information storage unit 8, and transmits the subquery in accordance with the transmission method. direction The formula includes a parallel transmission method in which all subqueries are transmitted at once, and a sequence transmission method in which subqueries are transmitted in order according to the transmission order based on the organization score of each organization.

[0025] The destination of the subquery is a rule checking device, which is a server provided for each organization. 20 0. Rule checking device for each organization 20 When the query processing device 100 receives a subquery, it checks whether the subquery complies with the organizational rules of its own organization, and returns the check result to the query processing device 100 as response information.

[0026] The organization-specific compliance status storage unit 10 is a rule checking device 200 (i.e., whether the subquery complies with the organizational rules) for each organization is stored. Here, the organization-specific compliance status information indicates "Compliant" for each organization if the subquery complies with the organizational rules, and indicates "Non-compliant" for each organization if the subquery does not comply with the organizational rules.

[0027] The comprehensive determination unit 11 determines whether the input query complies with the constraints based on the country compliance status information stored in the country compliance status storage unit 2 and the organization-specific compliance status information stored in the organization-specific compliance status storage unit 10. Specifically, the comprehensive determination unit 11 determines that the input query complies with the constraints if the country compliance status information indicates "Compliant" and the organization-specific compliance status information indicates "Compliant" for all organizations, and otherwise determines that the input query does not comply with the constraints.

[0028] The overall compliance status storage unit 12 stores overall compliance status information indicating the judgment result (whether the input query complies with the constraints) by the overall judgment unit 11. The overall compliance status information may be output to the sender of the input query, etc.

[0029] FIG. 2 is a flowchart for explaining the overall processing of the query processing device 100.

[0030] In the overall processing, first, the national regulation determination unit 1 performs a national regulation check to determine whether the input query complies with national regulations, and then executes a national regulation determination process (see Figure 3) to store national compliance status information indicating the determination result in the national compliance status storage unit 2 (Step A).

[0031] Next, the query control unit 50 performs an organizational rule check to determine whether the input query complies with the organizational rules of each organization, and executes an organizational rule determination process (see FIG. 5) to store organization-specific compliance status information indicating the determination result (step B).

[0032] Then, the comprehensive judgment unit 11 judges whether the input query is constraints and executes a comprehensive judgment process to store comprehensive compliance status information indicating the judgment result in the comprehensive compliance status storage unit 12 (step C), and then ends the process.

[0033] FIG. 3 is a flowchart illustrating an example of the national restriction determination process in step A of FIG.

[0034] In the country restriction determination process, the country restriction determination unit 1 first acquires an input query (step A1). For example, the country restriction determination unit 1 acquires an input query transmitted from an external device such as a client terminal operated by a user of the query processing device 100.

[0035] The country restriction determination unit 1 uses a Structured Query Language (SQL) parser to analyze (parse) the input query and identify operation items related to the operation requested by the input query (step A2). The operation items include operation target information that identifies the source data that is the target of the operation requested by the input query, the country from which the source data is transferred, the country to which the source data is transferred, whether aggregation of the source data is required, and whether masking of the source data is required. In this embodiment, the source data is a column as described above, and the operation target information includes, for example, a value that identifies the column (such as a column name), a value that identifies a table that has the column (such as a table name), and a value that identifies the organization that manages the table. The value that identifies the organization may be a location value that indicates the location of the organization.

[0036] The country restriction determination unit 1 determines whether or not the source data conforms to the data flow policy for each source data based on the operation items (step A3). For example, if the data flow policy describes data that is permitted to be transferred, the country restriction determination unit 1 determines that the source data conforms to the data flow policy if all operation items (operation target information, source country, destination country, whether aggregation is required, and whether masking is required) are described in the data flow policy.

[0037] The national restriction determination unit 1 determines whether the input query complies with the national restriction based on the determination result for each source data by the process of step A3 (step A4). Specifically, if all source data comply with the data flow policy, the national restriction determination unit 1 determines that the input query complies with the national restriction, and otherwise determines that the input query does not comply with the national restriction.

[0038] Then, the country regulation determination unit 1 generates country compliance status information indicating the determination result of step A4, stores it in the country compliance status storage unit 2 (step A5), and ends the process.

[0039] If the country compliance status information becomes "Non-compliant" in the above process, the overall compliance status information becomes "Non-compliant" in the overall determination process in step C, regardless of the processing result of the organizational rule determination process in step B of Fig. 2. Therefore, if the country compliance status information becomes "Non-compliant", the processing in step B may be skipped.

[0040] The data flow policy used in step A3 is set in advance by an administrator of the query processing device 100 or the like. Fig. 4 is a diagram showing an example of a policy setting screen for setting a data flow policy. The policy setting screen 400 shown in Fig. 4 has interfaces 401 to 407 for setting item values ​​for each item of the data flow policy (organization, table, column, source country, destination country, whether aggregation is required, and whether masking is required), and a confirm button 408 for confirming the item values ​​set in the interfaces 401 to 407 as the data flow policy.

[0041] FIG. 5 is a flowchart for explaining an example of the organizational rule determination process in step B of FIG.

[0042] In the organizational rule determination process, first, the query dividing unit 3 analyzes the input query using the SQL parser and extracts attribute information of the input query from the input query (step B1). The attribute information of the input query includes operation target information.

[0043] The query division unit 3 performs location analysis to identify the correspondence between the location of the organization and the source data based on the location table showing the correspondence between the location of the organization and the data managed by the organization and the attribute information extracted in step B1 (step B2).

[0044] The query dividing unit 3 divides the input query into sub-queries for each organization based on the result of the location analysis (step B3).

[0045] FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating an example of the subquery generation process for generating subqueries in steps B1 to B3. The example in FIG. 6 shows a federated query 600 containing a SELECT statement as the input query, and a location table 601. The variables of the SELECT statement, which are attribute information of the federated query 600, contain information that identifies the organization managing the source data, the column that is the source data, and the table that has that column. Specifically, in FIG. 6, the character strings P and Q contained in the variables are location values ​​that indicate the location of the organization, A and B are table values ​​that indicate the table, and a, aa, Sal, b, and bb are column values ​​that indicate the column. The location table 601 shows the correspondence between the character strings P and Q that indicate the location of the organization, the character strings A and B that indicate the table managed by the organization, and the character strings a, aa, Sal, b, and bb that indicate the columns in that table.

[0046] In step B1, attribute information 602 is extracted from the federated query 600, and in step B2, a correspondence 603 between the location of an organization and the attribute information is identified based on the location table 601 and the attribute information 602. Then, in step B3, the federated query 600 is divided into subqueries 604 for each location of the organization based on the correspondence 603.

[0047] Returning to the explanation of Fig. 5, the score calculation unit 7 executes a query score calculation process to calculate a query score for the input query based on the non-compliance rate of each organization calculated by the non-compliance rate calculation unit 5, and stores the query score in the score information storage unit 8 (step B4).

[0048] FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating an example of the query score calculation process for calculating the query score in step B4.

[0049] 7, in the query score calculation process, the score calculation unit 7 first identifies one or more columns Cij that are the target of operations in each of multiple subqueries Qi (i = 1 to n) generated from the input query Q. Then, the score calculation unit 7 obtains from the non-compliance proportion calculation unit 5 the non-compliance proportion Fij at which the operations required in the subqueries Qi do not comply with the individual rules Rij, which are organizational rules for each column Cij, and calculates the query score S by applying a sigmoid function to the sum of these proportions. Here, the subscript i identifies the organization, and the subscript j identifies one or more columns that are the target of operations in subqueries corresponding to the same organization.

[0050] Returning to the explanation of Fig. 5, the score calculation unit 7 executes a calculation process to calculate an organization score for each organization based on the non-compliance rate calculated by the non-compliance rate calculation unit 5 and the non-compliance determination time calculated by the non-compliance determination time calculation unit 6, and stores the organization score in the score information storage unit 8 (step B5).

[0051] In the process of calculating the organization score, the score calculation unit 7 calculates, for example, for each organization, the organization score by multiplying the non-compliance judgment time gi corresponding to that organization by the sum hi of the non-compliance ratios Fij for the individual rules Rij included in the organization rules of that organization (gi×hi) and applying a sigmoid function to the result.

[0052] Furthermore, the score calculation unit 7 stores the organization scores in the score information storage unit 8 as rank information in which the organizations are arranged in descending order of the organization scores.

[0053] FIG. 8 is a diagram showing an example of rank information indicating an organization score. Rank information 800 shown in FIG. 8 includes fields 801 to 802. Field 801 stores the name of a hospital as identification information for identifying a hospital, which is an example of an organization. Field 802 stores the organization score for the hospital. In addition, in the rank information 800, each record 8 03 are sorted in descending order of organizational score.

[0054] Returning to the explanation of Fig. 5, subquery control unit 9 executes a transmission method determination process (see Fig. 9) for determining a method for transmitting a subquery to each organization based on the query score stored in score information storage unit 8 (step B6).

[0055] The subquery control unit 9 transmits the subquery to the rule checking device of each organization based on the determined transmission method. 20 0. After that, the subquery control unit 9 sends the rule confirmation device 20 0, the response information is received as a confirmation result indicating whether the subquery complies with the organization rules, and the response information is stored in the organization-specific compliance status storage unit 10 as organization-specific compliance status information (step B7), and the process ends.

[0056] In step B7, if the transmission method is the sequence transmission method, subquery control unit 9 transmits the subqueries in order according to the transmission order based on the rank information stored in score information storage unit 8. At this time, when subquery control unit 9 receives response information for the previous subquery, it transmits the next subquery. In this case, the response information as When non-compliant response information indicating "Non-compliant" is received, regardless of the content of response information from other organizations, the overall compliance status information becomes "Non-compliant" in the overall determination process in step C of Fig. 2. Therefore, the subquery control unit 9 may stop sending subsequent subqueries.

[0057] FIG. 9 is a flowchart illustrating an example of the transmission method determination process in step B6.

[0058] In the transmission method determination process, the subquery control unit 9 first determines whether the query score S of the input query is equal to or less than a first threshold (step S1). 9In this example, the first threshold is set to 0.3, but is not limited to this example. In this embodiment, the larger the query score S, the higher the risk that the input query will be determined to not comply with the organizational rules. Therefore, a query score S equal to or less than the first threshold corresponds to a risk being equal to or less than a predetermined standard.

[0059] If the query score is greater than the first threshold (step S1: No), the subquery control unit 9 determines the transmission method to be the parallel transmission method (step S2), and ends the process.

[0060] On the other hand, if the query score is equal to or less than the first threshold (step S1: Yes), the subquery control unit 9 determines the transmission method to be the sequence transmission method (step S3).Then, the subquery control unit 9 selects, from the rank information, the record with the highest organization score among the records that have not yet been selected as the target record (step S4).

[0061] The subquery control unit 9 determines whether the organization score Si of the target record is equal to or less than the second threshold (step S5). 9 In this example, the second threshold is set to 0.7, but is not limited to this example. In this embodiment, the larger the organization score S, the higher the risk that the subquery will be determined to not comply with the organization rules. Therefore, an organization score S equal to or less than the second threshold corresponds to the risk being equal to or less than a predetermined standard.

[0062] If the tissue score is greater than the second threshold (step S 5 : No), the subquery control unit 9 adds the organization of the target record to the end of the transmission order list that indicates the transmission order of the subqueries (step S 7 Then, the subquery control unit 9 determines whether all organizations have been added to the transmission order list (step S 8 ). If all the subquery control unit 9 has not been added (step S 8 If all the data have been added (Step S4), the process returns to Step S5. 8:Yes), and then terminate the process.

[0063] Also, if the tissue score is equal to or less than the second threshold (step S 5 :Yes), and the subquery control unit 9 adds the remaining organizations together to the end of the sending order list (step S 6 ), and the process ends.

[0064] By the above process, the transmission method but In the sequential transmission method, the transmission order list stores organizations with organizational risks greater than a predetermined standard in descending order of organizational risk, followed by organizations with organizational risks less than the predetermined standard in the same transmission order. Therefore, the subquery control unit 9 transmits high-prediction subqueries, which are subqueries corresponding to organizations with organizational risks greater than the predetermined standard, in descending order of organizational risk, and transmits subqueries corresponding to organizations with organizational risks equal to or less than the standard all at once after transmitting the high-prediction subqueries.

[0065] Fig. 10 is a diagram showing an example of a transmission order list. In the transmission order list 1000 shown in Fig. 10, organizations are arranged in descending order of the transmission order of the subquery corresponding to that organization, and at the end, multiple organizations added in step S7 are stored as having the same transmission order.

[0066] FIG. 11 is a diagram illustrating the hardware configuration of the query processing device 100. As shown in FIG.

[0067] As shown in FIG. 11, the query processing device 100 is realized by a computer system having a processor 21, a main memory 22, a recording device 23, an input device 24, a display device 25, and a communication device 26, which are connected via a bus 27.

[0068] The recording device 23 is a device that records data in a writable and readable manner, and records the program that defines the operation of the processor 21 and various information generated and used by the program. For example, the recording device 23 stores history information, country compliance status information, compliance status information by organization, overall compliance status information, query scores, organization scores, etc.

[0069] The processor 21 is, for example, a CPU (Central Processing Unit), and is a control unit that reads a program recorded in the recording device 23 into the main memory 22 and executes processing according to the program using the main memory 22. The components and functions shown in FIG. 1 are realized by the processor 21. The input device 24 is a device into which various information is input by an operator of the query processing device 100, and this information is used in processing by the processor 21. The display device 25 is a device that displays various information. The communication device 26 communicates with other devices (such as the sender of the input query and the rule checking device 200) and transmits and receives various information.

[0070] At least a part of the processing by the processor 21 may be realized by a hardware circuit (for example, an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) or a field-programmable gate array (FPGA)).

[0071] As described above, according to this embodiment, the query division unit 3 generates multiple subqueries by dividing the input query by organization. The score calculation unit 7 calculates, for each organization, an organization score that evaluates the organization-specific risk, which is the risk that a subquery will be determined to not comply with the organizational rules of the organization corresponding to the subquery, based on historical information regarding the judgment results of whether or not the input query complies with the organizational rules of the organization corresponding to the subquery. The subquery control unit 9 transmits the subqueries to the rule confirmation device 200 in order according to the transmission order based on the organization scores, and receives response information to the subqueries from the rule confirmation device 200 in order. The comprehensive judgment unit 11 uses the response information to judge whether or not the input query complies with the constraints.

[0072] Therefore, it is possible to determine whether subqueries comply with the organizational rules in descending order of risk of being determined not to comply with the organizational rules, which makes it possible to prevent unnecessary subquery determinations from being made, thereby reducing the calculation cost for determining whether a query complies with constraints.

[0073] In this embodiment, the subquery control unit 9 stops sending the subquery when it receives non-compliance response information indicating that the subquery does not comply with the organizational rules. When the non-compliance response information is received, the comprehensive determination unit 11 determines that the input query does not comply with the constraints. This makes it possible to more appropriately reduce the calculation cost for determining whether the query complies with the constraints.

[0074] In this embodiment, the score calculation unit 7 calculates, for each organization, the non-compliance determination time required for determining that the input query does not comply with the organization rules and the non-compliance rate at which the input query is determined to not comply with the organization rules, based on the history information, and calculates the organization score based on the non-compliance determination time and the non-compliance rate. In this case, it is possible to more appropriately reduce the calculation cost for determining whether a query complies with the constraints.

[0075] Furthermore, in this embodiment, the subquery control unit 9 transmits highly predictive subqueries, which are subqueries corresponding to organizations whose organizational risk is greater than a predetermined standard, in descending order of organizational risk, and transmits subqueries corresponding to organizations whose organizational risk is equal to or less than the standard in a batch after transmitting the highly predictive subqueries. In this case, it is possible to transmit subqueries that are unlikely to be determined to not comply with the organizational rules in a batch after transmitting subqueries that are likely to be determined to not comply with the organizational rules, thereby reducing calculation costs and preventing an increase in the calculation time required to determine whether a query complies with a constraint.

[0076] Furthermore, in this embodiment, the score calculation unit 7 calculates a query score that evaluates the overall risk, which is the risk that the input query will be determined not to comply with the constraints, based on the history information. If the overall risk is equal to or less than a predetermined standard based on the query score, the subquery control unit 9 transmits the subqueries in order according to the transmission order, and if the overall risk is greater than the standard, transmits the subqueries all at once. In this case, if the risk that the input query will be determined to comply with the constraints is low, it becomes possible to transmit the subqueries all at once. R Therefore, it is possible to reduce the calculation cost and suppress an increase in the calculation time required to determine whether a query complies with the constraints.

[0077] Furthermore, in this embodiment, the score calculation unit 7 calculates, for each organization, the percentage of data that is determined to be non-compliant with each individual rule, which is an organizational rule corresponding to the data that is the target of the operation requested by the subquery, based on the history information, and calculates the query score based on the total value of these percentages. In this case, the query score can be set to a value that appropriately evaluates the overall risk.

[0078] In this embodiment, the attribute information specifying the data to be operated on in the input query includes a location value indicating the location of the organization. The query division unit 3 divides the input query into subqueries based on the location value. In this case, it is possible to appropriately generate subqueries.

[0079] The national restriction determination unit 1 determines whether the input query complies with national restrictions, which are restrictions on data set forth in the target country. The comprehensive determination unit 11 further uses the determination result by the national restriction determination unit 1 to determine whether the input query complies with the restrictions. In this case, the national restrictions may be set separately from the organization. fixed It can also accommodate existing constraints.

[0080] The above-described embodiments of the present disclosure are merely illustrative examples of the present disclosure, and are not intended to limit the scope of the present disclosure to these embodiments alone. Those skilled in the art may implement the present disclosure in various other forms without departing from the scope of the present disclosure. [Explanation of symbols]

[0081] 1: Country regulation determination unit 2: Country compliance status storage unit 3: Query division unit 4: History storage unit 5: Non-compliance rate calculation unit 6: Non-compliance determination time calculation unit 7: Score calculation unit 8: Score information storage unit 9: Subquery control unit 10: Organization-specific compliance status storage unit 11: Overall determination unit 12: Overall compliance status storage unit 50: Query control unit 100: Query processing device 110: Rule confirmation device

Claims

1. 1. A query processing device that determines whether an input query requesting an operation on a plurality of data managed by each of a plurality of organizations complies with constraints imposed on the data, comprising: a division unit that generates a plurality of sub-queries by dividing the input query for each of the organizations; a calculation unit that calculates, for each organization, an organization score that evaluates an organization-specific risk, which is a risk that the subquery will be determined to not comply with the organizational rule of the organization corresponding to the subquery, based on history information on a determination result of whether or not the input query complies with the organizational rule, which is the constraint for each organization; and a subquery control unit that transmits the subqueries to a confirmation device that confirms whether the subqueries comply with the organization rule of the organization corresponding to the subqueries in a transmission order according to the organization score, and receives response information to the subqueries from the confirmation device in order; a determination unit that determines whether the input query complies with the constraints using the response information.

2. the sub-query control unit, when receiving, as the response information, non-compliance response information indicating that the sub-query does not comply with the organizational rule, stops transmitting the sub-query; The query processing device according to claim 1 , wherein the determination unit determines that the input query does not comply with the constraint when the non-compliant response information is received.

3. 2. The query processing device of claim 1, wherein the calculation unit calculates, for each organization based on the history information, a required time required for a subquery corresponding to the organization to be determined to not comply with the organization rule and a percentage of the subqueries corresponding to the organization that are determined to not comply with the organization rule, and calculates the organization score based on the required time and the percentage.

4. 2. The query processing device according to claim 1, wherein the subquery control unit transmits highly predictive subqueries, which are subqueries corresponding to organizations whose organizational risk is greater than a predetermined standard, in order of increasing organizational risk based on the organizational score, and transmits subqueries corresponding to organizations whose organizational risk is equal to or less than the standard in a batch after transmitting the highly predictive subqueries.

5. the calculation unit calculates a query score by evaluating an overall risk, which is a risk that the input query will be determined to not comply with the constraint, based on the history information; and 2. The query processing device according to claim 1, wherein the subquery control unit transmits the subqueries in order according to the transmission order if the overall risk is equal to or less than a predetermined standard based on the query score, and transmits the subqueries all at once if the overall risk is greater than the standard.

6. 6. The query processing device according to claim 5, wherein the calculation unit calculates, for each of the organizations, a percentage of data that is determined to be non-compliant with an individual rule that is an organizational rule corresponding to the data that is the target of the operation requested in the subquery, based on the history information, and calculates the query score based on a total value of each percentage.

7. the attribute information specifying the data to be operated on in the input query includes a location value indicating a place where the organization is established; The query processing device according to claim 1 , wherein the dividing unit divides the input query into the sub-queries based on the location value.

8. a national regulation determination unit that determines whether the input query complies with a national regulation, which is the restriction stipulated in a target country related to the data; The query processing device according to claim 1 , wherein the determination unit determines whether or not the input query complies with the constraints by further using a determination result by the country restriction determination unit.

9. 1. A query processing method for a query processing device that determines whether an input query requesting an operation on a plurality of data managed by each of a plurality of organizations complies with constraints imposed on the data, the method comprising: generating a plurality of sub-queries by dividing the input query by the organizations; calculating, for each organization, an organization score that evaluates an organization-specific risk, which is a risk that the subquery will be determined not to comply with the organizational rule of the organization corresponding to the subquery, based on history information on a determination result of whether or not the input query complies with an organizational rule, which is the constraint for each organization; transmitting the sub-queries to a verification device that verifies whether the sub-queries comply with the organizational rules of the organizations corresponding to the sub-queries in a transmission order according to the organizational scores; receiving response information to the sub-queries from the verification device in sequence; The method of query processing further comprising: using the response information to determine whether the input query complies with the constraints.

Images