How compare SemanticXO journal to our actual implementation, regarding to disk space and performance (in a xo)
Gonzalo On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Christophe Guéret <c.d.m.gue...@vu.nl>wrote: > Dear all, > > A part of the project "SemanticXO" concerns the implementation of an > alternative Journal implementation making use of the triple store backend. > Triple store are data bases optimised to store factual information in the > form of statements linking a subject, a property and a value. This makes > them particularly fit to store key/value metadata, such as the one the > Journal uses. The feature proposal for SemanticXO gives more detailled > about what this is about: > http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Semantic_Web > > I've just finished removing a couple of bugs and would be interested in > getting a first round of feedback. > The installation procedure is not super convenient but should be > manageable anyway: > http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Semantic_Web/Testing > > The code is based on two parts: > * a module "common" that allows to store arbitrary data in the triple store > * a module "datastore" which uses "common" to store the data from the > Journal > I'm now working on implementing other usage examples for "common". In the > Journal, the most visible change is the possibility to browse the content > through the SPARQL interface of the triple store. This means it is > possible, and rather easy, to gather statistics about the activities > performed in a class room or do backup of the metadata without having to > interupt any other activity. > > Looking forward to your feedback, cheers, > Christophe > > > _______________________________________________ > Sugar-devel mailing list > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > >
_______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel