good morning;
> On 2017-10-10, at 23:32, George News wrote:
>
>
> On 2017-10-10 11:25, Rob Vesse wrote:
>> Personally I am certain that Jena is correct in its interpretation of
>> specification and that the specification is the appropriate.
>>
>> The key point here is
On 2017-10-10 11:25, Rob Vesse wrote:
> Personally I am certain that Jena is correct in its interpretation of
> specification and that the specification is the appropriate.
>
> The key point here is that any aggregation requires at least one group to
> operate over, in the absence of a GROUP
On 2017-10-09 17:19, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>
>
> On 09/10/17 15:27, George News wrote:
>> On 2017-10-09 12:31, james anderson wrote:
>>> good afternoon;
On 2017-10-09, at 12:03, George News wrote:
On 2017-10-09 11:53, Lorenz Buehmann wrote:
>
>
>
2017-10-10 3:23 GMT-06:00 Andy Seaborne :
> That syntax isn't legal.
>
> Date ==> DATA
>
> and presumably the rest is damage due to email.
>
>>
>> using a dataset: Persistent - dataset will persist across Fuseki restarts
>
>
> That will create and use a TDB database in
On 09/10/17 13:38, Laurent Rucquoy wrote:
Hello,
Just to recap, I was able to reload the TDB to be migrated but my migration
process became unusually slow on the reloaded TDB.
I have found a way to get better performance again by querying the union
graph named model instead of querying the
Personally I am certain that Jena is correct in its interpretation of
specification and that the specification is the appropriate.
The key point here is that any aggregation requires at least one group to
operate over, in the absence of a GROUP BY then there is an implicit group of
all
Hi Nick,
Inference (as well as GIS and fuzzy reasoning) are in my todo list to learn and
research how it works in Jena. In case you need some help with some code or for
reviewing/testing let me know. Is it for an internal project, or for an Open
Source project from CSIRO? At work (NIWA/NZ) we