Database Change Validation Engine for Data Integrity
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current database management systems face challenges in validating and managing changes to collections of data, particularly in ensuring data integrity and accuracy, as they often lack efficient mechanisms to handle user-proposed changes and potential conflicts between different versions of data.
Innovation Solution
A computer-implemented method for managing changes to a collection of records involves storing records with metadata maps for translation, validating proposed changes by querying the data storage system based on specific criteria, processing pending changes to identify conflicts, and determining the validity of the proposed change by verifying mappings between source and target values, ensuring that each target value is associated with only one source value.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If traditional database validation mechanisms are used, then data storage and retrieval are simple, but data integrity and accuracy cannot be ensured when managing changes to collections of records
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary validation of proposed changes against existing data and pending changes before allowing changes to be applied. This includes querying the data storage system to check for conflicts and processing pending changes to identify potential issues, ensuring data integrity is maintained before changes are committed to the database.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces an intermediary validation layer between data storage and change application. This intermediary system includes a validation engine that coordinates between the data storage system, pending changes, and proposed changes, acting as a mediator to ensure all validation criteria are met before changes are applied.
2Measurement precision
If comprehensive validation of proposed changes is performed, then data accuracy is maintained, but processing time and system complexity increase
Solution Approach 1:
The validation process is segmented into distinct phases: querying the data storage system based on validation criteria, processing pending changes separately, updating results by combining findings, and finally determining validity. This segmentation allows the system to validate data accuracy comprehensively while managing processing time through structured, modular validation steps.
3Productivity
If multiple changes are allowed to be processed concurrently, then system productivity increases, but conflicts between changes may occur
Solution Approach 1:
The system applies preliminary anti-action by validating proposed changes against pending changes before they are applied to the database. The validation engine proactively identifies potential conflicts between concurrent changes and prevents them from being applied, thereby eliminating harmful conflicts before they can affect data integrity.
Solution Approach 2:
The validation engine implements feedback by processing pending changes and using that information to validate proposed changes. The system updates validation results based on findings from pending changes, creating a feedback loop that ensures concurrent changes do not conflict with each other before being applied to the database.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
AI summary
Managing changes to a collection of records includes storing a first set of records in a data storage system, the first set of records representing a first version of the collection of records, and validating a proposed change to the collection of records specified by an input received over a user interface. The data storage system is queried based on validation criteria associated with the proposed change, and a first result is received in response to the querying. A second set of records is processed representing changes not yet applied to the collection of records to generate a second result. The first result is updated based on the second result to generate a third result. The third result is processed to determine whether the proposed change is valid according to the validation criteria.