Hi,
why don't you open a new JIRA issue (as a New Feature) for this?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA

You can then attach a patch to it. This way others can look at what you have 
done so far (and maybe help you out).

Thanks for your help,
Paolo

nat lu wrote:
> 
> I made a start, and tried to use one of the existing flavours, but ended
> up creating one for MonetDB - combination of derby and DB2. It doesnt
> like longs or unbounded varchars.
> 
> So, I got as far as getting SDBConfig to complete, but havent done an
> sdbload yet
> 
> 
> On 09/09/11 10:37, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 04/09/11 13:03, nat lu wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm going to give it a go sometime soon and report back on my
>>> non-scientific findings. Your point about the small number of columns is
>>> well made, but the research paper cited earlier also mentions this and
>>> reports that because of column store optimisations even when they
>>> vertically partitioned their data rather than using a property-table
>>> approach they still saw good improvement. However, again, I'm no column
>>> store expert so perhaps I'm missing some point here :-). Anyway, time to
>>> "suck it and see@, all in the name of progress of course.
>>>
>>> On 03/09/11 16:29, David Jordan wrote:
>>>> I have not used a column-oriented database, but I am somewhat familiar
>>>> with them. My understanding of them is that the storage is partitioned
>>>> on a column basis, such that there is no physical clustering together
>>>> of all the columns for a given row. An advantage of this would be in
>>>> the case where you have tables with many columns, but the particular
>>>> application only needs a small subset of columns.
>>>>
>>>> With the SDB representation of triples (3 columns) and quads (4
>>>> columns), and access typically based on having a specific value for
>>>> one or two of the columns, I am not so sure that a column-based
>>>> approach would offer any advantage.
>>>>
>>>> But again, I am no expert on these types of databases.
>>>>
>>>> These discussions about alternative datastore representations RDF/OWL
>>>> data are very useful, to gain better understanding of which data
>>>> architectures yield the best implementation approach for
>>>> high-performance.
>>>>
>>>> p.s. I Monet provides support for JDBC, I would not think much effort
>>>> is needed to support in with SDB.
>>
>> Shouldn't be too hard :-)  SDB targets SQL-92 and there are a few
>> extension points to cope with the vagaries of different SQL engines.
>> It's one of the reasons there are ~10 small files to write, to capture
>> the uniqueness of each SQL syntax.
>>
>>     Andy
> 

Reply via email to