On 06.03.2015 15:05, Nikolas Everett wrote: ...
Regarding Markus' points:
...
The obvious question that comes from this point is "why not use Virtuoso? it is exposed publicly all over the place, you can talk to the dbpedia folks, they do it" and this is a very compelling argument
As long as you are convinced that BlazeGraph can deliver at least medium level query performance (I guess your evaluation involved performance tests), then I am convinced that it is a good choice for us. Our use case is relatively small in terms of data but large in terms of users. In this setting, high availability is more important than raw query performance. Moreover, it is fair to assume that the query loads that today's public SPARQL endpoints are getting are quite different in nature than what we would have for Wikidata's query service anyway, so there is no guarantee that any system will work for us without adjustments. And of course we may hope that the use of a standard data format and query language would still allow us to consider other systems in the future if necessary, and many of the work done up until then will still be meaningful. For now, the most important thing is to get started :-)
Cheers, Markus _______________________________________________ Wikidata-tech mailing list Wikidata-tech@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-tech
