W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > March 2005

Re: Sorting

From: Phil Dawes <pdawes@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 08:20:51 +0000
Message-ID: <16942.45539.186501.610625@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org, Leigh Dodds <leigh@ldodds.com>

Hi Dan,

Dan Connolly writes:
 > 
 > On Mar 8, 2005, at 3:49 PM, Danny Ayers wrote:
 > > On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 15:08:16 -0600, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> 
 > >
 > > I don't understand why sorting should compete with streaming - isn't
 > > the transport at a different layer than order?
 > 
 > Er... no. The bytes coming over the wire (in the variable binding 
 > results)
 > are ordered. In order to sort the results, you can't send one along as 
 > soon as
 > you establish that it matches the query; you have to wait until
 > you have all the results, since the last one you find might be
 > the first one by the sort order.
 > 

Not really - a store can often achieve ordering on-the-fly by using
indexes, so it matches the results in the appropriate order.

Also note that since un-typed literals can be sorted in multiple ways
(numeric, alphabetic) you'd probably want to consider putting this
into the orderby syntax. 

Cheers,

Phil
Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2005 12:37:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:14:48 GMT