- From: Eric Jain <Eric.Jain@isb-sib.ch>
- Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 15:01:45 +0200
- To: Geoff Chappell <gchappell@intellidimension.com>
- CC: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Geoff Chappell wrote: > Well, there's no doubt that we're benefiting from caches for the example > queries (both the Gateway page cache, and the OS disk cache). If I restart > the Gateway application/server, the queries run as quickly so I suspect the > disk cache is providing the greatest benefit). That said, no cache would > make up for a lack of efficient indices on such a large database. The box > the queries are running in has 4GB of ram and the database is 27GB (of used > space), so random queries are bound to go outside of any cache - sooner or > later some query response times will be somewhat limited by the speed of the > disk. That's quite impressive, then. I assume clearing the disk cache would not cause queries that executed within a second to suddenly run for minutes... Still, I'll have to see for myself before I believe it :-) > Not yet. I'm planning to add a sparql interface and will probably throw up > something that lets you query with our native query language (since it's > more expressive than sparql). I've also done a bit of work on an > ontology-driven search/browse interface for it which I'll likely complete at > some point. I'll keep you posted. That would be great. I have some interesting queries I'd like to try out, if possible.
Received on Thursday, 12 May 2005 12:58:52 UTC