On 25/10/17 14:21, Rob Vesse wrote:
“However, no integrated benchmark-independent execution framework for these
benchmarks has yet been provided.”
My 2012 self is somewhat disappointed :(
https://github.com/rvesse/sparql-query-bm
Quite!
I don't see any references to benchmark techniques in other areas like SQL.
Do all these research papers really think they are comparable with the
way that real systems are benchmarked? Guess tuning parameters, use a
desktop machine, no SSD. 2+ year old software.
What about txn per dollar? :-)
I am glad that Fuseki is coming out well on reliability.
Andy
Rob
On 25/10/2017 14:08, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
https://iswc2017.semanticweb.org/paper-70/
is a paper in the main conference track at ISWC. It is exercising Jena 2.3.0, but I'm not sure if that version number is
for Jena/TDB or Fuseki. It is using Java 7, which makes me think they mean
Fuseki 2.3.0 (Jena/TDB 3.0.0), which is still
considerably out of date. Same story, different day...
--
ajs6f
