The Use Of Keys Is Instrumental In Data ✓ Solved

The Use Of Keys Are Instrumental In Data

Answer the following question: The use of keys are instrumental in database management. Primary keys allow for distinct records and foreign keys tie records together to create unique relationships between two or more entities and/or tables. In Blockchain, we know that a hash is the equivalent to a key - and makes the chain secure and indisputable (or so we think). Why is it then that with an RDBMS, a primary key and foreign key can still create redundancy, thereby causing data anomalies? Can the same be said about blockchain?

Paper For Above Instructions

The fundamental role of keys in database management systems (DBMS), particularly within relational databases (RDBMS), is to ensure data integrity, facilitate efficient data retrieval, and establish unique or relational connections between data entities. Primary keys serve as unique identifiers for records within a table, preventing duplication and maintaining consistency, while foreign keys are used to enforce referential integrity between related tables by linking records through shared key values. Despite these crucial functions, their use can still lead to redundancy and data anomalies, which raises questions about their effectiveness and whether similar issues can occur in blockchain systems.

In relational databases, primary and foreign keys, while designed to promote data consistency, can inadvertently contribute to redundancy due to several inherent limitations of the relational model. One of the core issues is improper database design or normalization deficiencies. For example, if a database is denormalized to optimize read performance, redundant data can be introduced intentionally or unintentionally. This is common in cases like repeating groups or redundant attributes replicated across multiple tables. Even with properly defined primary and foreign keys, anomalies such as update, insertion, and deletion anomalies can occur if the tables are not correctly normalized or if referential integrity constraints are not strictly enforced (Date, 2004).

Furthermore, referential integrity constraints enforced by foreign keys prevent orphaned records but do not eliminate the possibility of redundancy. For instance, multiple records in a child table might reference the same parent record, leading to duplication of the referencing process but not necessarily the data itself. Such designs can result in inconsistencies if data is updated in one part of the database but not propagated appropriately across related tables, especially in distributed or poorly maintained systems (Elmasri & Navathe, 2015).

Another aspect involves the concept of data anomalies, which include insertion anomalies (difficulty inserting new data without creating redundant or inconsistent data), update anomalies (necessity to update multiple records to maintain consistency), and deletion anomalies (unexpected data loss when deleting records). These issues underline that even with primary and foreign keys, the relational model requires rigorous normalization and proper schema design to minimize redundancy and anomalies. This highlights that keys alone are not a panacea for data integrity; they must be complemented by thoughtful schema design and data management practices.

Transitioning to blockchain technology, the question arises whether similar issues of redundancy and anomalies exist despite the cryptographic security of hashes (keys). In blockchain, each block contains a cryptographic hash of the previous block, creating an immutable chain that is highly resistant to tampering (Nakamoto, 2008). The hash functions as a key, anchoring the block securely within the chain and ensuring data integrity. However, blockchain architectures have their own limitations regarding redundancy and data anomalies.

Blockchain inherently promotes data uniqueness and integrity through cryptographic hashes and consensus mechanisms, which make tampering computationally impractical. Nonetheless, redundancy can still occur, especially in systems where multiple copies of the blockchain exist across nodes (Jiang & Zeng, 2019). Such replication is intentional and necessary for decentralization, fault tolerance, and availability, but it can also lead to data duplication and storage inefficiencies.

Furthermore, blockchain's immutability means that once data is recorded, it cannot be easily corrected or deleted. This feature, while fortifying data security, can cause data anomalies similar to update anomalies in RDBMS if erroneous data is initially entered. Because records are immutable, correcting mistakes often involves appending new data rather than modifying existing entries, which can lead to data redundancy and inconsistencies over time (Gervais et al., 2016).

Additionally, some blockchain implementations operate in permissioned or private networks, where data structures could become redundant or contain anomalies if not carefully managed. For example, multiple nodes storing duplicate data may exhibit redundancy, but this is generally by design for security and resilience rather than a flaw. Nonetheless, excessive duplication can impact network efficiency and storage costs (Zamani et al., 2018).

In conclusion, while the core mechanisms of keys in RDBMS and hashes in blockchain serve to ensure data integrity and security, they do not inherently prevent redundancy or data anomalies. Proper database normalization and schema design are crucial in relational databases to mitigate these issues despite the presence of keys, whereas blockchain's structure inherently limits data manipulation but still faces challenges related to redundancy and data management over time. Recognizing these similarities and differences highlights the importance of context-specific data governance strategies to maintain data integrity and efficiency.

References

  • Date, C. J. (2004). Database Design and Relational Theory. O'Reilly Media.
  • Elmasri, R., & Navathe, S. B. (2015). Fundamentals of Database Systems (7th ed.). Pearson.
  • Gervais, A., Karame, G. O., Wüst, K., Glykantzikis, V., & Capkun, S. (2016). On the security and performance of Proof of Work Blockchains. Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 3–16.
  • Jiang, E., & Zeng, D. (2019). Blockchain technology and its applications: a review. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 31(5), 877-891.
  • Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. Retrieved from https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
  • Zamani, M., Bist, H., Bensaid, A., & Hu, P. (2018). Green blockchain: A review of energy-efficient consensus mechanisms. IEEE Access, 6, 79090-79104.

Related Assignments