Re: TPF and DBMSes (was Re: Hydra and Shapes)

On 11/23/14 4:56 AM, Ruben Verborgh wrote:
> Hi Kjetil,
>
>> But I think that misses the crucial point, which is how things happen behind that. Strictly, Ruben is right; you can basically materialize all possible triple patterns, with pages, and store them in a file system. In that case, it is correct that no DBMS is involved.
>>   
>> However, I would claim that this is not practical in almost all cases.
> It really depends on the update frequency of the datasets.
> Some of the most referenced datasets in the SemWeb are static,
> like the various DBpedia versions we all know very well,
> and those never change once created (not talking about Live).
> Hence, we are able to host them through the HDT compressed triple format,
> which gives excellent performance for those cases,
> far better than what I've seen any DBMS do.

How can that be so? Virtuoso is a DBMS. As far as I know, you haven't 
made claims about trumping a SPARQL DBMS in the performance stakes. All 
your claims have been about a perception of "High Availability" for 
which your challenge has been accepted in full, on our part :)

> Once you have updates, the answer certainly changes.
> DBMSes are then definitely the better answer.

See my comment about Read-Only scenarios and ad-hoc queries.


>
> Best,
>
> Ruben
>


-- 
Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com
Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this