- From: Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>
- Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 09:30:55 +0100
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: public-hydra@w3.org
>> 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? Because HDT is much simpler than a DBMS; it can only do read-only operations. Everything is static. We have measured that HDT performs the combination of “looking up data corresponding to a triple pattern” plus “give an estimate count of the number of matching triples” faster than Virtuoso or any other DBMS we tested. For numbers, see http://linkeddatafragments.org/publications/ldow2014.pdf#page=7. > As far as I know, you haven't made claims about trumping a SPARQL DBMS in the performance stakes. I indeed did not. If you look at my original reply, out of which the above snippet was taken, you will see it was in the context of triple pattern fragments (the “them” above). I said that HDT is faster than all DBMSes I have tested for serving triple pattern fragments—but an HDT file is static. Best, Ruben
Received on Monday, 24 November 2014 08:31:29 UTC