- From: Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 17:56:18 +0100
- To: "Kashyap, Vipul" <VKASHYAP1@PARTNERS.ORG>
- Cc: <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
>>>>> "KV" == Kashyap, Vipul <VKASHYAP1@PARTNERS.ORG> writes: >> Not at doing DL reasoning. Relational databases do relational >> stuff well. For everything else, they are as likely to be rubbish >> as fast. KV> [VK] Agreed! But the hypothesis is that mapping into a proven KV> scalable technology such as an RDBMS, even if as a component KV> helps build a scalable DL reasoner. The hypothesis is only going to be true IF the mapping is scalable. Otherwise, it doesn't work. KV> This is what is exciting about Instance store that it uses RDBMS KV> and SQL queries as a subcomponent (generating candidate answers) KV> and then does post-processing after that. KV> In all the above examples, each of them had to obviously KV> implement something extra, but RDBMS+SQL was leveraged as an KV> important component. There are two different things in the technologies you mentioned; relational to X mapping tools, and metaschema approaches. They are quite different. For the instance store, the relational database is really an implementation detail. It's basically a reasoner with somewhat limtied expressivity which is persistent and (hopefully) scalable. Because it's using a metaschema approach, you can't do things like use RDBMS security, for example (beyond yes/no). KV> I think the SW community should seek to leverage known scalable KV> technologies to reach industrial strength scalability and KV> performance. Sure, would agree. Phil
Received on Friday, 15 September 2006 16:56:52 UTC