[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1926?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17147376#comment-17147376
 ] 

Julian Gonggrijp commented on JENA-1926:
----------------------------------------

[~andy] So these particular two queries happen to be equivalent, although the 
same could not be safely assumed about similar pairs of queries in general. 
Point taken and thanks for confirming.

>From your explanation, I understand that the realized performance depends on 
>many factors, only some of which are predictable across datasets and 
>installations, and that it may be premature to document this particular 
>situation for this reason. The somewhat spectacular performance difference 
>between these particular two queries on my particular dataset and installation 
>might be a statistical fluke. I will let this rest.

Thanks again for your patience and guidance, also to [~rvesse]. I wish you good 
luck and perhaps we will meet again, here on Jira or maybe even in the Jena 
codebase.

> Query execution speed depends more on WHERE clause order than expected
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: JENA-1926
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1926
>             Project: Apache Jena
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: ARQ
>    Affects Versions: Jena 3.15.0
>            Reporter: Julian Gonggrijp
>            Priority: Minor
>
> The following query takes about 6.5 seconds with my dataset, which 
> unfortunately I cannot share. Note that {{?source}} is bound to a single IRI 
> in all queries below; I'm leaving that out for brevity.
> {code:java}
> PREFIX oa: <http://www.w3.org/ns/oa#>
> PREFIX dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/>
> CONSTRUCT {
>     ?annotation ?a ?b.
>     ?body ?c ?d.
>     ?target ?e ?f.
>     ?selector ?g ?h.
> } WHERE {
>     ?annotation oa:hasBody ?body;
>                 oa:hasTarget ?target;
>                 dcterms:creator ?user;
>                 ?a ?b.
>     ?target oa:hasSource ?source;
>             oa:hasSelector ?selector;
>             ?e ?f.
>     ?selector ?g ?h.
>     OPTIONAL { ?body ?c ?d }.
> }
> {code}
> Compare this to the following query, which I believe is exactly equivalent 
> but takes only 2 seconds:
> {code:java}
> CONSTRUCT {
>     ?annotation ?a ?b.
>     ?body ?c ?d.
>     ?target ?e ?f.
>     ?selector ?g ?h.
> } WHERE {
>     ?annotation oa:hasBody ?body.
>     OPTIONAL { ?body ?c ?d }.
>     ?annotation oa:hasTarget ?target;
>                 dcterms:creator ?user;
>                 ?a ?b.
>     ?target oa:hasSource ?source;
>             oa:hasSelector ?selector;
>             ?e ?f.
>     ?selector ?g ?h.
> }
> {code}
>  For comparison, leaving out the optional {{?body}} entirely, I get a query 
> that executes in 1.7 seconds:
> {code:java}
> CONSTRUCT {
>     ?annotation ?a ?b.
>     ?target ?e ?f.
>     ?selector ?g ?h.
> } WHERE {
>     ?annotation oa:hasTarget ?target;
>                 dcterms:creator ?user;
>                 ?a ?b.
>     ?target oa:hasSource ?source;
>             oa:hasSelector ?selector;
>             ?e ?f.
>     ?selector ?g ?h.
> }
> {code}
> I'm a novice to SPARQL, but coming from SQL, I wouldn't expect query 
> execution speed to depend so much on the order in which the criteria are 
> given.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Reply via email to