- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 14:15:15 -0400
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>, William Waites <ww@styx.org>
- Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 17:39 +0100, Andy Seaborne wrote: > > On 10/05/11 14:45, William Waites wrote: > > I'm looking at requirements for making available some large datasets, > > and ran the back of the envelope calculation below. . . . > > There are compression techniques, or data structures that don't store > the whole of the quad where there is repetition. For example, for > (g,s,p,o), some index data structures can store one (g,s) and all the > (p,o). This might well be done by a index data structure that stores > common prefixes anyway rather than needing a special data structure for > RDF quads. Jim Hendler and others (Medha Atre, Jagannathan Srinivasan, James A. Hendler) have done some work on more efficient storage for RDF: http://www.cs.rpi.edu/%7Eatrem/bitmat_techrep.pdf I don't know the current status of their work. -- David Booth, Ph.D. http://dbooth.org/ Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of his employer.
Received on Tuesday, 10 May 2011 19:15:38 UTC