- From: Aidan Hogan <aidan.hogan@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 22:48:03 +0100
- To: public-lod@w3.org
Hi, [Sorry, I could have consolidated with previous mail.] On 16/04/2013 22:10, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > On 4/16/13 4:27 PM, Aidan Hogan wrote: >> In summary: >> >> * "SPARQL scales in some cases" = vague, but okay >> * "SPARQL scales" = not okay > Does SQL scale? No. > In short, does any query language scale in this context? In which context? I don't know if it answers your question, but XPath 1.0 is PTime and is parallelisable. It scales better than SPARQL, but I would still hesitate to call it "scalable". In any case, this is besides the point of whether or not "SPARQL scales". To reassure, I like SPARQL. I am not criticising SPARQL or saying that there's something that is better than SPARQL at what it does. Anything that offers the power of the SPARQL query language will have the same scalability concerns. My core point is that *one cannot make blanket guarantees for scalability with respect to something like SPARQL*. I hope we could agree on that point. > How does some RESTful pattern scale in a manner that surpasses what's > possible with a declarative query language? ... if it is possible to "support" the RESTful pattern in a compliant manner over larger (general) inputs than likewise possible for the declarative language. > My original context for scale was a single interaction pattern over HTTP > that's endowed with a declarative query language. Perhaps we were not originally on the same page then. Apologies if so. > SPARQL Protocol patterns are more scalable than REST interaction > patterns since you have one vs a N number of different RESTful patterns. You mean that if I wanted to run 1 SPARQL query, I would have to create N Restpark requests? I can't imagine that the intention of Luca's proposal is to support generic SPARQL queries. > That said, I am eternally interested in useful SPARQL queries that make > a useful case for SPARQL not being scalable when the goal is a useful > solution. See previous mail. :) Cheers, Aidan
Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2013 21:48:31 UTC