I believe TDB may be tailored towards the use of named graphs. At least I made the experience when working to adapt Jena SDB. Named graphs will probably not use so much overhead.
Daniel On Thursday, August 11, 2011, Henry Story <henry.st...@bblfish.net> wrote: > > On 10 Aug 2011, at 15:59, Tsuyoshi Ito wrote: > >> Hi >> >> I tried to copy a felix-cache (latest platform without additional resources in the graphs) from one pc to another. During the copy process I realized that each graph is exactly 201,4MB on my mac. So a platform with no extra data is about 1.2GB - quite big. Each additional graph is using also 200MB. >> >> Has this to do with the update of tdb? 3-4 month ago a graph with no triples was very small. >> >> Is it possible to reduce the file size? > > Thanks for pointing that out. I just checked the size of bundle 100 and just on my pretty empty test > database that I run locally and delete every so often, it is 1.5GB! > > $ du -d 2 -h felix-cache/bundle100/ > 1.5G felix-cache/bundle100//data/tdb-data > 1.5G felix-cache/bundle100//data > 16K felix-cache/bundle100//version0.0 > 1.5G felix-cache/bundle100/ > > So for the Social Web applications I am working where I would like to work with a lot of graphs, this is not good. I'd like to know the reason for this. But it does look like a reason to switch to Sesame otherwise... > > Henry > > >> >> >> Cheers >> Tsuy >> > > Social Web Architect > http://bblfish.net/ > >
