Re: Performance issues with OWL Reasoners

>>>>> "KV" == Kashyap, Vipul <VKASHYAP1@PARTNERS.ORG> writes:

  >> I may be wrong here, but as far as I know the expressivity of
  >> OWL-DL, for example, is too different from that of RDBMS for this
  >> to work completely.

  KV> However, this was done primarily for CLASSIC and other DLs which
  KV> were possibly less expressive than OWL-DL and FACT. 

Yeah, it's straight forward enough if you just have, for example,
subsumption and existentials. 


  KV> I was wondering if the current implementations of DL reasoners
  KV> such as Pellet, Racer, etc. adopt this strategy.

Not as far as I know. 


  >> Having said that there is a similar approach, which uses
  >> RDBMS. For example, the instance store
  >> (http://instancestore.man.ac.uk)

  KV> [VK] Maybe the increased expressivity of OWL-DL leads to the
  KV> above design choice of SQL + reasoning.

Yes. Why try to get a RDBMS to do DL reasoning, when a tableaux
reasoner can do it for you? 

Phil