skip to main content
10.1145/2882903.2899391acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmodConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

CLAMS: Bringing Quality to Data Lakes

Published:26 June 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

With the increasing incentive of enterprises to ingest as much data as they can in what is commonly referred to as "data lakes", and with the recent development of multiple technologies to support this "load-first" paradigm, the new environment presents serious data management challenges. Among them, the assessment of data quality and cleaning large volumes of heterogeneous data sources become essential tasks in unveiling the value of big data. The coveted use of unstructured and semi-structured data in large volumes makes current data cleaning tools (primarily designed for relational data) not directly adoptable.

We present CLAMS, a system to discover and enforce expressive integrity constraints from large amounts of lake data with very limited schema information (e.g., represented as RDF triples). This demonstration shows how CLAMS is able to discover the constraints and the schemas they are defined on simultaneously. CLAMS also introduces a scale-out solution to efficiently detect errors in the raw data. CLAMS interacts with human experts to both validate the discovered constraints and to suggest data repairs.

CLAMS has been deployed in a real large-scale enterprise data lake and was experimented with a real data set of 1.2 billion triples. It has been able to spot multiple obscure data inconsistencies and errors early in the data processing stack, providing huge value to the enterprise.

References

  1. A. Chalamalla, I. F. Ilyas, M. Ouzzani, and P. Papotti. Descriptive and Prescriptive Data Cleaning. In SIGMOD, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. S. Chaudhuri and U. Dayal. An Overview of Data Warehousing and OLAP Technology. SIGMOD Rec., 26(1):65--74, Mar. 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. X. Chu, I. F. Ilyas, and P. Papotti. Discovering Denial Constraints. Proc. VLDB Endow., 6(13):1498--1509, Aug. 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. X. Chu, I. F. Ilyas, and P. Papotti. Holistic Data Cleaning: Put Violations Into Context. In ICDE, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. I. F. Ilyas and X. Chu. Trends in cleaning relational data: Consistency and deduplication. Foundations and Trends in Databases, 5(4):281--393, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. CLAMS: Bringing Quality to Data Lakes

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        SIGMOD '16: Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Management of Data
        June 2016
        2300 pages
        ISBN:9781450335317
        DOI:10.1145/2882903

        Copyright © 2016 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 26 June 2016

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate785of4,003submissions,20%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader