GQL and SQL/PGQ: Theoretical Models and Expressive Power
Amélie Gheerbrant, Leonid Libkin, Liat Peterfreund, Alexandra Rogova
Abstract
SQL/PGQ and GQL are very recent international standards for querying property graphs: SQL/PGQ specifies how to query relational representations of property graphs in SQL, while GQL is a standalone language for graph databases. The rapid industrial development of these standards left the academic community trailing in its wake. While digests of the languages have appeared, we do not yet have concise foundational models like relational algebra and calculus for relational databases that enable the formal study of languages, including their expressiveness and limitations. At the same time, work on the next versions of the standards has already begun, to address the perceived limitations of their first versions. Motivated by this, we initiate a formal study of SQL/PGQ and GQL, concentrating on their concise formal model and expressiveness. For the former, we define simple core languages -Core GQL and Core PGQ -that capture the essence of the new standards, are amenable to theoretical analysis, and fully clarify the difference between PGQ's bottom up evaluation versus GQL's linear, or pipelined approach. Equipped with these models, we both confirm the necessity to extend the language to fill in the expressiveness gaps and identify the source of these deficiencies. We complement our theoretical analysis with an experimental study, demonstrating that existing workarounds in full GQL and PGQ are impractical which further underscores the necessity to correct deficiencies in the language design.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 143d016c-0590-4334-89bf-8ed11054736eCited by top-tier papers4
- Decisionhouse: Prescriptive Analytics in the Data StackMatteo Brucato, Fjodor Kholodkov, Soren Little, Jakob Mayer et al.VLDB 2026 · 2 citations
- Guarded Negation Transitive Closure LogicDiego Figueira, Santiago Figueira, Yoshiki NakamuraLICS 2026
- A Unified Query Planning Framework for Conjunctive Regular Path QueriesYue Pang, Lei Zou, Angela Bonifati, M. Tamer Özsu et al.VLDB 2026
- MGQL: An Executable, Small-Step Semantics of GQLAditya Thimmaiah, Tong-Nong Lin, Milos GligoricOOPSLA 2026
Builds on1
Related papers
- Computing Why-Provenance for Property Graph QueriesKoumudi Ganepola, Maxime Jakubowski, Katja HoseVLDB 2026
- Flexible and Expressive Typed Path Patterns for GQLWenjia Ye, Matías Toro, Tomás Díaz, Bruno C. d. S. Oliveira et al.OOPSLA 2025 · 1 citation
- Repairing Property Graphs under PG-ConstraintsChristopher Spinrath, Angela Bonifati, Rachid EchahedVLDB 2026 · 1 citation
- Towards a Converged Relational-Graph Optimization FrameworkYunkai Lou, Longbin Lai, Bingqing Lyu, Yufan Yang et al.SIGMOD 2025 · 4 citations
- Temporal Regular Path QueriesMarcelo Arenas, Pedro Bahamondes, Amir Aghasadeghi, Julia StoyanovichICDE 2022 · 11 citations
