Claude Warren created JENA-528:
----------------------------------
Summary: Deprecation of BulkUpdateHandler has unintended
consequences for other projects
Key: JENA-528
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-528
Project: Apache Jena
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Jena
Affects Versions: Jena 2.10.1
Reporter: Claude Warren
Priority: Blocker
Description copied from email conversations:
SDB currently implements its own BulkUpdateHandler, and I just made some tests
that indicate that it is significantly faster than using GraphUtil.add (2
seconds versus 40 seconds for 10k triples). Now that BulkUpdateHandler has been
deprecated, and Model.add is already using GraphUtil.add, what call sequence
are we supposed to use to retain the good performance of the BulkUpdateHandler?
Could a method Graph.add(Iterable<Triple>) be added to allow graphs to optimize
the behavior for specific Graph types?
I understand SDB is rather unsupported, but the issue is really a question on
the core API.
Deprecating the BulkUpdateHandler will not only affect SDB but any other
database such as Oracle RDF (the Jena adapter of which implements its own BUH
right now). Granted, the class is not gone yet, but some existing API calls
(Model.add) already bypass the BulkUpdateHandler, and I believe this was
premature (revision 1419595). My suggestion is to continue to delegate
Model.add through the BulkUpdateHandler for the upcoming release until the
interface has been truly removed/replaced with something else. BUH does not
represent much implementation overhead for Graph implementers, because they can
simply use the default implementation. The current implementation is too
inefficient for our product.
If there is a cleaner mechanism to get the same performance, then I'd be happy
to hear about it.
===
On 9/4/2013 3:15, Claude Warren wrote:
As I recall the discuss around this topic dealt with the idea that you
could add each triple inside a transaction and when the transaction
committed transaction code would do the bulk update if supported.
However
I may be way off base here. I have no objection to retaining the BUH.
==
If this were the case, then the code in the GraphUtil helper functions should
probably wrap the individual performUpdate calls with a transaction, but they
don't.
I would greatly appreciate seeing this resolved before the final release. As
suggested earlier, we could gain time for a proper redesign by avoiding the
calls to the GraphUtil replacement functions, or changing those functions so
that they call graph.getBulkUpdateHandler() for the time being, and possibly
undeprecate BUH for now.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
