Re: Requirements: tooling & named graphs

Hello Lee,

> > CONSTRUCT approach does not provide enough information about mapping to
> > SPARQL-to-SQL optimizing compiler. Efficient mapping requires much more
> > details than CONSTRUCT may fit. It would be nice to use CONSTRUCT but
> > we've made much more complicated language to not kill the performance.
> Can you talk more about the requirements that you've identified for a 
> mapping language for performance reasons that go beyond the expressivity 
> of CONSTRUCT queries? Is there a write-up of this somewhere?

I've re-checked docs I have for a feature but found no complete list,
like one rationale+example pair per feature.
contains description of our mapping language with some (boring) examples
presented to the group before contains mapping requirements backed by
the experience accumulated by developers of Virtuoso-based applications.

I'll try to prepare some list of cases in form of
--- a SPARQL query,
--- a "good" mapping with a feature in question,
--- resulting SQL (good one),
--- a bad SQL if the feature is missing.
The problem is to find queries that will result in readable SQLs.

Best Regards,

Ivan Mikhailov
OpenLink Software

Received on Friday, 12 March 2010 17:30:46 UTC