Re: linked data hosted somewhere

Hugh Glaser wrote:
> Thanks, Kingsley and Aldo.
> I have to say you raise quite a lot of concerns, or at least matters of
> interest.
> I really don't think it is a big deal that I asked someone to consider
> resources when accessing my web site, and I am a bit uncomfortable that I
> then get messages effectively telling me that my software is poor and I
> should be using (buying?) something else.
>   
Hugh,

You're losing me a little, I don't think Aldo or I were making any 
comments about your software per se. or making suggestions about 
alternatives.

Anyway more comments inline below.
> On 26/11/2008 02:12, "Kingsley Idehen" <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
>
>   
>> Hugh Glaser wrote:
>>     
>>> I thought that might be the answer.
>>> So what is the ontology of the error, so that my SW application can deal with
>>> it appropriately?
>>> If it ainąt RDF it ainąt sensible in the Semantic Web.
>>> ;-|
>>> And the łentitlement˛ to spend lots of money by accident; a bit worrying,
>>> although I assume there are services that allow me to find out at least
>>> estimates of the cost.
>>>
>>>       
>> If you are querying via iSQL or the Virtuoso Conductor you wont be
>> moving lots of data between your desktop and EC2. If you do large
>> constructs over the sparql protocol or anything else that produces large
>> HTTP workloads between EC2 and your location, then you will incur the
>> costs (btw - Amazon are quite aggressive re. the costs, so you really
>> have to be serving many client i.e., offering a service for costs being
>> a major concern).
>>     
> Er, yes, that was the question we were discussing.
> Large constructs over the sparql prototcol.
> With respect to costs, I never mentioned Amazon, so I am not sure why that
> is the benchmark for comparison.
> But I don't want to have a go at the Openlink software (I often recommend it
> to people); I was just asking about limitations.
> All software has limitations.
>   
>> Anyway, Virtuoso let's you control lots of things, including shutting
>> down the sparql endpoint. In addition, you will soon be able to offer
>> OAuth access to sparql endpoint etc..
>>     
> Yes, and I didn't really want to have the overhead of interacting with
> Ravinder to explain why I had shut down his access to the SPARQL endpoint.
>   
>>> I suspect that your comment about a bill is a bit of a joke, in that normal
>>> queries do not require money?
>>> But it does raise an interesting LOD question.
>>> Ravinder asked for LOD sets; if I have to pay for the query service, is it
>>> LOD?
>>>
>>>       
>> You pay for traffic that goes in and out of your data space.
>>
>> (effective November 26, 2008)
>> Fixed Costs ($)
>>     
> <snip amazon costs/>
>   
>> Here is a purchase link that also exposes the items above.
>> https://aws-portal.amazon.com/gp/aws/user/subscription/index.html?ie=UTF8&offe
>> ringCode=6CB89F71
>>
>> Of course, you can always use the Open Source Edition as is and
>> reconstruct DBpedia from scratch, the cost-benefit analysis factors come
>> down to:
>>
>> 1. Construction and Commissioning time (1 - 1.5 hrs vs 16 - 22 hrs)
>> 2. On / Off edition variant of live DBpedia instance that's fully tuned
>> and in sync with the master
>>     
>>> Getting back to dealing with awkward queries.
>>> Detecting what are effectively DoS attacks is not always the easiest thing to
>>> do.
>>> Has Bezzo really solved it for a SPARQL endpoint while providing a useful
>>> service to users with a wide variety of requirements?
>>>
>>>       
>> I believe so based on what we can do with Virtuoso on EC2.  One major
>> example is the backup feature where we can sync from a Virtuoso instance
>> into S3 buckets. Then perform a restore from those buckets (what we do
>> re. DBpedia). In our case we offer HTTP/WebDAV or the S3 protocol for
>> bucket access.
>>     
> I don't think this contributes to helping to service complex SPARQL queries,
> or have I missed somthing?
>   

Hugh:  I certainly had my response above a little tangled :-(

To clarify, re.  Bezos and DOS bit. 

1.  EC2 instances can be instantiated and destroyed at will
2.  Virtuoso (and I assume other SPARQL engines) have DOS busting 
features such as SPARQL Query Cost Analysis and Rate Limits for HTTP 
requests.


>>> In fact, people donąt usually offer open SQL access to Open Databases for
>>> exactly this reason.
>>> I like to think the day will come when the Semantic Web is so widely used
>>> that we will have the same problem with SPARQL endpoints.
>>>
>>>       
>> The Linked Data Web is going to take us way beyond anything SQL could
>> even fantasize about (imho). And one such fantasy is going to be
>> accessible sparql endpoints without bringing the house down :-)
>>     
> Now there I agree.
> The power of LD/SW or whatever you call it will indeed take us a long way
> further.
> And I agree on the fantasy, which is actually what I was saying all along.
> It is a fantasy to suggest that "you can do all the wrong you want".
>   
Exactly!
> But I think it is sensible to take the question to a new thread...
>   

No problem :-)


Kingsley
> Best
> Hugh
>   
>> Kingsley
>>     
>
>
>   


-- 


Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	      Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     Web: http://www.openlinksw.com

Received on Wednesday, 26 November 2008 22:30:23 UTC