W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > February 2001

RE: Decentralized RDF Distribution

From: <ssarkar@ayushnet.com>
Date: 21 Feb 2001 09:06:54 -0800
Message-ID: <20010221170654.16406.cpmta@c001.snv.cp.net>
To: danny@panlanka.net
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
On Tue, 20 February 2001, "Danny Ayers" wrote:

> Ok, so it's easy enough to store triples/quads as
> records in a table, but when you come to doing anything with them you have
> to use different structures - so persistence in a tree-structured DB/an
> ODBMS could potentially be more efficient overall.

This is a debate for last 10-15 years.  ODBMS 
seems to support more friendly semantics but
it fails to match RDBMS internal mechanics for
normalization/transaction/integrity (direct pointers
are bad things -- this is another story). Now there are O-RDBMS with Java,XML bound inside 
RDBMS. Unified data model for multiple O-RDBMS
is supported using internet directories.
My vote is for RDBMS/O-RDBMS -- any other effort will
finally fail.

> I think a modified version of the transaction (which encompasses distributed
> sources of data) is a way to go. But note the word modified.

Unified data model over multiple O-RDBMS addresses
transaction over ditributed sources of data.  A RDF
document can be a view over multiple O-RDBMS in a 
unified model.  Transactions and view generations
can be all made seamless.

> I strongly suspect more than this will be required - for instance (perhaps)
> a system close to the database that monitors for potential infinite
> loops/destructive conflicts. I reckon it would probably make sense to
> associate such protection with the storage mechanism rather than with the
> communication/inference systems.
> There is one assumption your time-stamping approach is making, that I think
> at least needs questioning -
> will the most recent version of a piece of information always be the most
> valid?

Consistency, validity checks, multple views/updates
are all now known technology in a RDBMS.
All these things can be pushed inside disparate 

Received on Wednesday, 21 February 2001 12:07:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:34 UTC