As promised the follow up with some test results.

I created CLEREZZA-736 [1] and attached the test report and a patch

Hopefully others have some ideas why the new implementation still
consumes so much memory.

Regards,

Minto

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/

Op 8-3-2013 12:09, Minto van der Sluis schreef:
> Hi Reto,
>
> I already modified the existing implementation. Later I will post my
> changes and results. Now I am kind of in a hurry.
>
> Regards
>
> Minto
>
> Op 8-3-2013 8:51, Reto Bachmann-Gmür schreef:
>> Not sure why this would relevantly increase performance. Access to set is
>> supposed to be fast.
>>
> This is not for performance reasons but for scalability. Especially for
> very large indexes it should not be required to keep the full index in
> memory all the time. In my implementation I chose to use a specific
> named graph for the index.
>
> It appear that it does increase performance in the long run, but that
> will be in my full report later.
>
>> Good, then let's optimize the clerezza perfomance. I think the Sparql
>> fastlane is an important step. Reto 
> Like  mentioned I already started. Also did some performance comparison
> between the single dataset provider and my modified version.
>
> Full report comes later.
>
>
>


-- 
ir. ing. Minto van der Sluis
Software innovator / renovator
Xup BV

Mobiel: +31 (0) 626 014541

Reply via email to