- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 12:15:13 -0000
- To: "Danny Ayers" <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, <public-sparql-dev@w3.org>
-------- Original Message -------- > From: Danny Ayers <> > Date: 9 November 2006 17:54 > > I'm querying across multiple named graphs, and given the shape of the > data it looks like I'll have the choice between - > > a) creating a dataset and using queries with multiple GRAPH blocks > b) merging the graphs into one and then querying that as the default > graph > > Either way I should get the same results. Typically there will be a > single shared node across the graphs, a kind of foreign key (this is > also currently the name of a graph, though that may change). > > Is either approach likely to be significantly faster in general, or is > it entirely case-dependent? I'd guess that a merged graph wil be faster, at least not slower. The nature of the query will have a big effect though. Andy > > I've a feeling this has an obvious answer but seem to have a mental > block on factoring these things out. > > Implementationwise I'm using ARQ in-memory (already flipped there from > using MySQL-backed models, there's a possibility of having to flip > back, praise be to common interfaces). > > Cheers, > Danny. > > -- > > http://dannyayers.com
Received on Wednesday, 15 November 2006 13:11:51 UTC