RE: SPARQL performance for ORDER BY on large datasets

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-sparql-dev-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sparql-dev-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Richard Newman
> Sent: 03 October 2009 03:16
> To: lindstream@gmail.com
> Cc: public-sparql-dev@w3.org
> Subject: Re: SPARQL performance for ORDER BY on large datasets
> 


<snip/>

> My personal opinion: the BSBM serves a limited purpose for people
> evaluating triple stores, but strikes me as very SQL-ey in style: the
> data are the opposite of sparse, and it's not a network. Relational
> databases are a much, much better fit for this problem, and thus it's
> not very interesting. It's a little benchmarking how well an Excel
> spreadsheet can do pixel animation: sure, you can do it, but there are
> other tools which are both mature and more suitable, so why bother?

Wasn't the original point of BSBM to compare RDF stores with RDF-to-RDB and native SQL for a common application?  If so, the fact the RDF forms match SQL-style is necessary.

	Andy