- From: Jerven Bolleman <jerven.bolleman@isb-sib.ch>
- Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 09:49:14 +0200
- To: public-lod@w3.org
Forgot reply all -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Public SPARQL endpoints:managing (mis)-use and communicating limits to users. Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 23:21:46 +0200 From: Jerven Bolleman <jerven.bolleman@isb-sib.ch> To: Rob Warren <warren@muninn-project.org> Hi Rob, There is a fundamental problem with HTTP status codes. Lets say a user submits a complex but small sparql request. My server sees the syntax is good and starts to reply in good faith. This means the server starts the http response and sends an 200 OK Some results are being send.... However, during the evaluation the server gets an exception. What to do? I can't change the status code anymore... Waiting until server know the query can be answered is not feasible because that would mean the server can't start giving replies as soon as possible. Which likely leads to connection timeouts. Using HTTP status codes when responses are likely to be larger than 1 MB works badly in practice. Regards, Jerven On Apr 18, 2013, at 10:53 PM, Rob Warren wrote: > On 18-Apr-13, at 8:53 AM, Jerven Bolleman wrote: >> >> Many of the current public SPARQL endpoints limit all their users to queries of limited CPU time. >> But this is not enough to really manage (mis) use of an endpoint. Also the SPARQL api being http based >> suffers from the problem that we first send the status code and may only find out later that we can't >> answer the query after all. Leading to a 200 not OK problem :( > > Jerven, > > I agree that a 200 reply to 'query too complex', 'query too big' or 'query timeout' is not acceptable. However, limits on queries are a tool to keep dumb clients from pounding on the server too hard. > > A standardized reply / error would be something that I would like to see in that it allows the client to modify its approach to querying the server. It would also be an opportunity to have the server signal to the client what trade-off it is willing to make between sending more triples and increasing the query complexity. > > Could '413 Request Entity Too Large', '429 Too Many Requests' and '453 Not Enough Bandwidth' be abused here for Sparql endpoints? > > rhw > ------------------------------------------------------------------- Jerven Bolleman Jerven.Bolleman@isb-sib.ch SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics Tel: +41 (0)22 379 58 85 CMU, rue Michel Servet 1 Fax: +41 (0)22 379 58 58 1211 Geneve 4, Switzerland www.isb-sib.ch - www.uniprot.org Follow us at https://twitter.com/#!/uniprot -------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 19 April 2013 07:50:16 UTC