Consider the following three relations
Employee (eid, eName), Comp(cid, cName), Own(eid, cid). Which of the following relational algebra expression return the set of eids who own all brands:
The question asks us to identify the specific relational algebra expression that correctly retrieves the set of employee IDs ($eid$) for employees who own *every* brand ($cid$) available in the $Comp$ table. We are given three relations:
The core challenge here is finding employees associated with *all* items in a set, which typically involves the relational algebra division operator ($/$).
The division operator, denoted by $/$, is used when you want to find tuples in one relation that are related to *every* tuple in another relation based on certain attributes. If relation $R$ has schema $(X, Y)$ and relation $S$ has schema $(Y)$, then $R / S$ yields a relation with schema $(X)$ containing tuples $t$ from $R$ such that for *all* tuples $u$ in $S$, the tuple $tu$ (concatenation) exists in $R$.
In our case:
Therefore, the general form should be $\Pi_{eid}(Own) / \Pi_{cid}(Comp)$, but we need to consider the exact structure from the options.
Let's break this down:
This expression correctly uses the division operator to find employees who own all brands.
This option calculates the Cartesian product ($\times$) of all employee IDs and all brand IDs. This results in a list pairing every employee with every brand, which doesn't tell us which employees own *all* brands. It simply lists all possible combinations.
This calculates the Cartesian product of the $Own$ relation with the set of all brand IDs. For each actual ownership record ($eid1, cid1$), it pairs it with every brand ID $cid2$ from $Comp$, producing tuples like $(eid1, cid1, cid2)$. This does not isolate employees owning *all* brands.
This option is structurally flawed. Firstly, $\Pi_{cid, cName} (\text{Own})$ is invalid because the $Own$ relation does not contain the $cName$ attribute. Even if we assume a corrected structure for the division part, the overall logic involves multiplying the set of all $eid$s with the result of a division, which doesn't fit the requirement of finding employees who own all brands.
Based on the analysis, the relational division operator is the correct tool for this task. Option 1 correctly applies the division operator $/$ to the $Own$ relation and the set of all brand IDs derived from $Comp$ to find the employees who own every brand.
Consider the given relations $X$, $Y$ and $Z$. The relation $X$ has three columns $P$, $Q$ and $R$. The relation $Y$ has three columns $P$, $Q$ and $S$. The relation $Z$ has two columns $P$ and $T$.
Table X
| P | Q | R |
|---|---|---|
| P1 | Q1 | R1 |
| P2 | Q2 | R2 |
| P3 | Q3 | R2 |
Table Y
| P | Q | S |
|---|---|---|
| P1 | Q1 | 2 |
| P1 | Q2 | 5 |
| P2 | Q1 | 6 |
| P3 | Q3 | 1 |
Table Z
| P | T |
|---|---|
| P1 | T1 |
| P3 | T2 |
| P4 | T3 |
| P4 | NULL |
Consider the relational algebra expression $$ \Pi_{P, R, S} \left[ \left( \sigma_{(Q = Q3 \lor R = R2)} [X \bowtie Y] \right) \bowtie \left( \sigma_{(S > 1)} [Y \bowtie Z] \right) \right] $$ where $\bowtie$ denotes natural join operation.
Which of the following options is the correct output for the given expression?
Consider a database that includes the following relations:
Defender($name, rating, side, goals$)
Forward($name, rating, assists, goals$)
Team($name, club, price$)
Which ONE of the following relational algebra expressions checks that every name occurring in Team appears in either Defender or Forward, where $\phi$ denotes the empty set?
Consider the following three relations:
Car (model, year, serial, color)
Make (maker, model)
Own (owner, serial)
A tuple in Car represents a specific car of a given model, made in a given year, with a serial number and a color. A tuple in Make specifies that a maker company makes cars of a certain model. A tuple in Own specifies that an owner owns the car with a given serial number. Keys are underlined; (owner, serial) together form key for Own. ($\bowtie$ denotes natural join)
$ \pi_{\text{owner}} (\text{Own} \bowtie (\sigma_{\text{color}=\text{"red"}} (\text{Car} \bowtie (\sigma_{\text{maker}=\text{“ABC”}} \text{Make})))) $
Consider the following tables, Loan and Borrower of a bank.
| Loan | Borrower | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| loan_num | branch_name | amount | customer_name | loan_num |
| L11 | Banjara Hills | 90000 | Anand | L11 |
| L14 | Kondapur | 50000 | Karteek | L11 |
| L15 | SR Nagar | 40000 | Ankita | L15 |
| L22 | SR Nagar | 25000 | Gopal | L19 |
| L23 | Balanagar | 80000 | Karteek | L22 |
| L25 | Kondapur | 70000 | Karteek | L23 |
| L19 | SR Nagar | 65000 | Sunil | L23 |
| Sunil | L25 | |||
Query: $\pi_{\text{branch\_name}, \text{customer\_name}}(\mathbf{Loan} \bowtie \mathbf{Borrower}) \div \pi_{\text{branch\_name}}(\mathbf{Loan})$
where $\bowtie$ denotes natural join.
The number of tuples returned by the above relational algebra query is _______
(Answer in integer)