Hey Ben,
Thanks for explaining so clearly.
I do understand graph databases and their querying challenges. :-)
What I've not heard about is the successful application of indexes to these
problems given that indexes in this case (as far as I know) are dependent
upon the relationship between entities rather than just upon the indexed
entity itself (which is also why
location points are slightly difficult though soluble because they are only
two dimensional while space-time becomes rapidly nastier as you add another
dimension).
Are you actually creating and maintaining indexes or are you just
calculating index values for a single use and then discarding them?
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Goertzel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 7:51 PM
Subject: **SPAM** Re: [agi] Development Environments for AI (a few
non-religious comments!)
Mark Waser wrote:
I am pretty confident that the specialized indices we use (implemented
directly in C++) are significantly faster than implementing comparable
indices in an enterprise DB would be.
Wow. You've floored me given that indexes are key to what enterprise DBs
do well. What are the special requirements/functionalities of the
indices that you believe that enterprise DBs are not *optimized* to
handle?
Look at the literature regarding "graph databases" for some general
background in this area... e.g. here is a random presentation on graph
DB's...
www.ciw.cl/material/irw-2005/2005-irw-gutierrez.pdf
Novamente's internal AtomTable is a customized, in-RAM hypergraph DB, with
much relationship to prior graph DB's..
Another example, beyond standard graph DB stuff, is efficient lookup of
spatiotemporal entities based on which space, time or spacetime points
they are near to ...
-- Ben
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ben Goertzel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 6:34 PM
Subject: **SPAM** Re: **SPAM** Re: [agi] Development Environments for AI
(a few non-religious comments!)
>> Also, why would 32 -> 64 bit be a problem, provided you planned for
it in advance?
Name all the large, long-term projects that you know of that *haven't*
gotten bitten by something like this. Now, name all of the large,
long-term projects that you know of that HAVE gotten bitten repeatedly
by the state of the art moving past something that they have custom
programmed and can't easily integrate. If the second number isn't a
lot larger than the first, you're not living in my world. :-)
I think you're exaggerating the issue. Porting the NM code from 32->64
bit was a pain but not a huge deal, certainly a trivial % of the total
work done on the project.
I do not think an enterprise DB would serve well for Novamente. I am
pretty confident that the specialized indices we use (implemented
directly in C++) are significantly faster than implementing comparable
indices in an enterprise DB would be.
However, the advantage of an enterprise DB would be that you'd avoid
some of the work involved in making NM a distributed system --- work we
know how to do, but haven't done yet, because it's time-consuming...
-- Ben
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
