Touché :->
On Friday, October 24, 2014, Rupert Westenthaler < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Rafa > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Rafa Haro <[email protected] > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > I completely understand your point but I partially disagree. I find the > memory consumption requirement quite tough. It may prevent a lot of people > to give it try or experiment with it. Actually, Chalitha had serious > problems to find a machine for testing it. I agree that probably it is > difficult to find a valid architecture for any disambiguation approach, but > focusing only in Aida-Light I think that it is worth to provide also an > other data management solution. It will affect the performance for sure, > but at least it will let people use it without a super machine. I’m > actually thinking in alternatives that can “simulate” memory access using > the disk like LevelDB or similar. > > > > Makes sense? > > > > IMO no and here is why: > > * If you need to solve this problem for a developer - find a way to > trim down the size of the dataset - yago - so that he can test in > setups with 5Gbyte of RAM > * For a real installation you do not want to solve the problem as for > dedicated machines memory is really cheap. Implementing an alternative > that can use some hard drive technology would just be so much slower > that you would always opt for the more memory option. > > So if your concern is about ease of deployment for developers or > demoability I would recommend to work on a way to extract meaningful > sub-sets of Yago that can be managed by Aida-Light setups requiring < > 10GByte of RAM. > > best > Rupert > > > -- > | Rupert Westenthaler [email protected] > <javascript:;> > | Bodenlehenstraße 11 ++43-699-11108907 > | A-5500 Bischofshofen > | REDLINK.CO > .......................................................................... > | http://redlink.co/ >
