On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 11:23 AM Jerven Bolleman et al wrote:
>
> >> So we are playing the game since ten years now: Everybody tries other
> databases, but then most people come back to virtuoso.
>
Nothing bad about virtuoso, on the contrary, they are a prime
infrastructure provider (Except maybe their trademark SPARQL query: "select
distinct ?Concept where {[] a ?Concept}" ;). But I personally think that
replacing the current WDS with virtuoso would be a bad idea. Not from a
performance perspective, but more from the signal it gives. If indeed as
you state virtuoso is the only viable solution in the field, this field is
nothing more than a niche. We really need more competition to get things
done.
Since both DBpedia and UniProt are indeed already running on Virtuoso -
where it is doing a prime job -, having Wikidata running on another
vendor's infrastructure does provide us with the so needed benchmark. The
benchmark seems to be telling some of us already that there is room for
other alternatives. So it is fulfilling its benchmarks role.
Is there really no room for improvement with Blazegraph? How about graphDB?
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
