Fantastic! Now impatiently waiting for AROUND implementation in wdq2sparql :-)
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 6:51 PM James Heald <j.he...@ucl.ac.uk> wrote: > Just to add a little bit about those timings: > > The number of hits and the query time are pretty similar for items > within Greater London: > http://tinyurl.com/z6h7tvn > (4687 items in 562 ms) > > compared to items within 10km of Trafalgar Square: > http://tinyurl.com/j7jyc27 > (6616 items in 668 ms) > > > The total number of statues we have is 11884 > http://tinyurl.com/zuscnnt > (342 ms) > > All of these numbers are quite small, suggesting the performance issue > isn't necessarily to do with what gets looked up first, but may be > something else to do with the join. > > -- James. > > > On 10/05/2016 18:28, James Heald wrote: > > Very nice! > > > > As a slight tweak on your query, here are some statues within 10km of > > London's Trafalgar Square > > http://tinyurl.com/htxqp5t > > > > ... or within 10km of Stockholm's Stortorget > > http://tinyurl.com/jnv5qo3 > > (Warning: per a recent decision of the Swedish Supreme Court, the latter > > search may be a copyright violation). > > > > Probably quite a lot of items to add on both counts -- has anybody > > scoured Commons for public art, that may not yet have an article in any > > Wikipedia? -- but really exciting to be able to produce output like this > > so easily. > > > > One thing I'm a little nervous about is that the first search is taking > > six and a half seconds to run, compared to 809 ms for every statue > > within Greater London > > http://tinyurl.com/hwf7pjg > > which I would have thought ought to be a similar-sized query. > > > > I haven't checked the optimiser output -- is this likely to be because > > the join has been performed in a different order? Or is there a good > > reason why the geo-search should be so much slower, even now it has > > indexing built in ? > > > > One other thing for the wishlist -- it would be really nice if the map > > mouseovers could show thumbnails (and indeed if there was a toggle to > > allow them for the table output, too). Also, should the Commons links > > not point to the file information pages, or alternatively to > > MediaViewer, rather than directly to the images? The latter makes it > > very hard to see the attribution information (etc) for the images, which > > could be a licence violation, eg of CC-BY. > > > > But overall: wow! Fantastic! > > > > All best, > > > > James. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata mailing list > Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >
_______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
