Hi Jack,
short answer: You'll need the SPIN API [1] as a plugin to Fuseki. Fuseki
by itself does not know what to do with the RDF declarations of SPIN
functions - they are just triples for Fuseki.
BTW afn:localname is not just a TopBraid function, but is originally
from Jena. So it works in
I have exported a bunch of graphs to a .ttl file and then imported it into
fuseki. If I run a query on fuseki to see if the functions are there - they
are. If I run a query on fuseki to show the spin:body or spin:constraints
they show them as anonymous objects (is that the correct term?). If I r
Charlie,
Transactions against SDB are atomic. There will never be a partial commit.
There is an in-memory buffering graph in the write-through cache making sure
that operations are indeed atomic.
Data doesn¹t corrupt. And multiple concurrent transactions should execute
the same as if they were do
Sorry for this kind of question we need a minimal reproducible
example/test case. It is really difficult to guess what's wrong. If you
suspect sp:text, then you could confirm this yourself if you just switch
your file back to RDF triples.
Holger
On 2/26/2015 20:55, Claudia Grieco wrote:
Ther
Hi Scott and Irene --)
As always, thank you for taking the time to address the questions, all of
which came up in the context of discussing EVN and its SDB (or Virtuoso or
other) persistence bindings. The core question(s) revolve around the
notion of how the definition of "transaction" -- which i
Charlie; In terms of transaction management, one way to understand it is
that since a relational back-end is used to store all data, the
transactional guarantees from the relational system hold. I.e., all
changed are executed as fully or roll-back and retry; however the
relational system performs
Charlie,
I am not sure I fully understand the question, but I will try to answer in
somewhat high level terms. If you need more details, maybe Scott could answer
or we could pass your question on to the development team.
As multiple users make edits, these edits are written into a database. Mor
Thanks Irene. A follow-up question is how the transaction management that
lives in SDB (and that no one here doubts) is (or is not) manifest in EVN
per se. In other words, what is the notion of "transaction management" at
the graph level independent of its commitment to persistence through SDB?
We recommend SDB in the multi user read/write scenarios because it has better
support for transactions. If you have a load and read-only scenario, TDB is a
good choice. TopBraid includes a streaming data loader for TDB.
Note, however, that there are some known issues with TDB on Windows. They ha
Are there performance and size metrics available for why one would choose
to use one or the other of these approaches as an export/transfer format?
Thanks --
charlie
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group
"TopBraid Suite Users", the topics of which include
There are some rules that are applied to super classes of the instances,
but some simple rules (ex. insert height and width to an instance of
'rectangle') shouldn't have these problems.
My rules are in sp:text, is this a problem? I'm using Spin API 1.4.0
bye
Claudia
Il giorno giovedì 26 febbraio
11 matches
Mail list logo
