and of course not to forget the fully open source SPARQL 1.1 compliant RDF
database Apache Jena with TDB. Did you already evaluate Apache Jena for use
in wikidata?
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:07 PM Andra Waagmeester <an...@micel.io> wrote:
>
>
> 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
>
--
---
Marco Neumann
KONA
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
