I would lean towards either an advertisable value or a standard error pattern. Different systems will have radically different load patterns, and we probably don’t want to accidently prevent people from building systems in ways that make sense.
— David
David Newbury, Enterprise Software Architect | The J. Paul Getty Trust | (310) 440 6116 | getty.edu<http://www.getty.edu/>
[../../Getty_Logo_EmailSig.png]
From: Antonin Delpeuch <antonin@delpeuch.eu>
Date: Saturday, June 13, 2020 at 11:56 PM
To: "public-reconciliation@w3.org" <public-reconciliation@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Q about reconciliation query batch size
Resent-From: <public-reconciliation@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Saturday, June 13, 2020 at 11:55 PM
On 11/06/2020 17:58, Ford, Kevin wrote:
I’m familiar in an academic sense with OpenRefine, but not whether it might control the size of query batches to ensure a provider is not overwhelmed. That said, if this work is to become a more generic way to provide reconciliation or suggest services to be used by software other than OpenRefine, then it still seems this should be an advertiseable/controllable value since one cannot always count on the client being responsible.
I think it would make sense to improve the specs on this: for instance, to specify a maximum batch size beyond which the service will refuse to respond to requests.
Antonin
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Getty. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify the sender and know the content is safe.
