I've already emailed you this once but to re-iterate

See http://www.apache.org/foundation/mailinglists.html which explains how
to subscribe and unsubscribe from any Apache mailing list

Specifically you want to unsubscribe from [email protected]

Rob



On 08/01/2014 09:24, "Laurent Martin" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Hello,
>
>I could not find the way to unregister from this mailing-list.
>Could you please remove my email address from mailing list ?
>
>Thanks in advance,
>Laurent MARTIN
>
>
>2014/1/7 Rob Vesse (JIRA) <[email protected]>
>
>>
>>      [
>> 
>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-615?page=com.atlassian.jira.pl
>>ugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel]
>>
>> Rob Vesse updated JENA-615:
>> ---------------------------
>>
>>     Attachment: inequality_sp2b_250k.txt
>>                 inequality_sp2b_250k.csv
>>                 inequality_sp2b_50k.txt
>>                 inequality_sp2b_50k.csv
>>                 inequality_sp2b_10k.txt
>>                 inequality_sp2b_10k.csv
>>                 inequality_lubm0.txt
>>                 inequality_lubm0.csv
>>                 inequality_bsbm_1M.txt
>>                 inequality_bsbm_1M.csv
>>
>> Result files for the results discussed in prior comments
>>
>> > Possible optimisation for FILTER(?var != <constant>)
>> > ----------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> >                 Key: JENA-615
>> >                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-615
>> >             Project: Apache Jena
>> >          Issue Type: Improvement
>> >          Components: ARQ
>> >            Reporter: Rob Vesse
>> >            Assignee: Rob Vesse
>> >            Priority: Minor
>> >              Labels: algebra, optimization, sparql
>> >         Attachments: inequality_bsbm_1M.csv, inequality_bsbm_1M.txt,
>> inequality_lubm0.csv, inequality_lubm0.txt, inequality_sp2b_10k.csv,
>> inequality_sp2b_10k.txt, inequality_sp2b_250k.csv,
>> inequality_sp2b_250k.txt, inequality_sp2b_50k.csv,
>>inequality_sp2b_50k.txt
>> >
>> >
>> > I have an idea for a possible optimisation for queries of the
>>following
>> general form:
>> > {noformat}
>> > SELECT *
>> > WHERE
>> > {
>> >   # Some Patterns
>> >   FILTER(?var != <http://constant>)
>> > }
>> > {noformat}
>> > This pattern crops up surprisingly often in real SPARQL workloads
>>since
>> it is often used to either limit a variable to exclude certain
>> possibilities or to avoid self referential links in the data.
>> > In some cases it seems like this could be safely rewritten as follows:
>> > {noformat}
>> > SELECT *
>> > WHERE
>> > {
>> >   # Some Patterns
>> >   MINUS { BIND(<http://constant> AS ?var) }
>> > }
>> > {noformat}
>> > Or perhaps in a more generalised form like so:
>> > {noformat}
>> > SELECT * WHERE
>> > {
>> >   # Some patterns
>> >   MINUS { VALUES ?var { <http://constant/1> <http://constant/2> } }
>> > }
>> > {noformat}
>> > Which would nicely deal with the case of stating that a variable is
>>not
>> equal to multiple constant values.
>> > As I pointed out earlier this would not apply in every case,
>> specifically I think at least the following must be true:
>> > - The variable must be guaranteed to be bound (similar to existing
>> filter equality and implicit join optimisations)
>> > There is also the potential to spot cases where the variable will
>>always
>> be unbound and thus the expression is always an error and replace the
>> entire sub-tree with {{table empty}} as we already do for equality and
>> implicit join filters.
>> > I plan on taking a look at implementing this in the new year, if
>>anyone
>> has any thoughts on this (especially wrt to restrictions that should
>>apply
>> to when the optimisation is considered safe) then please comment.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
>> (v6.1.5#6160)
>>




Reply via email to