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.
http://docs.openlinksw.com/virtuoso/rdfsparqlintegrationmiddleware.html#rdfviews
contains description of our mapping language with some (boring) examples
and http://esw.w3.org/topic/Rdb2RdfXG/ReqForMappingByOErling
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
http://virtuoso.openlinksw.com

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