- From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 23:30:47 -0500
- To: Yosi Scharf <syosi@MIT.EDU>
- Cc: public-cwm-talk@w3.org
Sounds like a great improvement. This is just not repeating the rules on old data. But what about patterns which bridge old and new data? Tim On 2007-11 -17, at 23:13, Yosi Scharf wrote: > > I was researching rule engines, are I realized that I might be able to > improve cwm's performance in some cases tremendously without too much > effort, but insuring that only new triples are matched. > > as an example: > > > (using http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/cwm-1.2a2.tar.gz ) > syosi@YOSI:~/tarballs/cwm-1.2.0a2$ time ./cwm > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/test/reason/longChain.n3 --think > > real 7m44.575s > user 6m15.083s > sys 0m3.728s > > > compare that to the following > > (using http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/cwm-1.2a3.tar.gz , which was > made from > the above tarball by changing query.py and llyn.py) This passes all > tests that the other one passes, which make me feel confidant. > > syosi@YOSI:~/tarballs/cwm-1.2.0a3$ time ./cwm > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/test/reason/longChain.n3 --think > > real 0m24.497s > user 0m21.757s > sys 0m0.264s > > > This was an extreme example, but did this change break anything? Is it > useful? > > > Yosi
Received on Sunday, 18 November 2007 23:45:38 UTC