- From: Chime Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:17:18 -0500
- To: Bob DuCharme <bob@snee.com>
- Cc: public-sparql-dev@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 20 December 2012 21:17:49 UTC
If the implementation evaluates the patterns in the order you provide (rather than determine an optimal evaluation strategy independent of the structure of the given query), I think it does make sense. -- Chime Ogbuji Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com) On Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Bob DuCharme wrote: > Since OPTIONAL clauses have no chance of reducing the search space for > their containing graph pattern, does it make sense as a general rule of > thumb to put them after all the ones that do, i.e. after the > non-OPTIONAL triple patterns? > > thanks, > > Bob
Received on Thursday, 20 December 2012 21:17:49 UTC