[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-244?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13271778#comment-13271778
]
Dave Reynolds edited comment on JENA-244 at 5/9/12 8:38 PM:
------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, once the forward chaining is done, and so long as you are not changing the
underlying data, the models might as well then be static.
You shouldn't *need* to call the explicit pre-prepare in that case (it's a long
time since I looked at that code so there may be problems there, but at least
different ones). If that doesn't work then the explicit pre-prepare should
definitely work whereas with the hybrid/backward chaining it may not.
If you can get a minimal reproducible test case that you could share that would
be fantastic!
Dave
was (Author: der):
Yes, once the forward chaining is done, and so long as you are not changing
the underlying data, the models might as well then be static.
You shouldn't *need* to call the explicit pre-prepare (but it's a long time
since I looked at that code so there may be a bug there but it will at least be
a different bug)
The locking for all that is simpler than for backward chaining (doesn't mean
there isn't a bug!). If it isn't then the pre-prepare should definitely work
whereas with the hybrid/backward chaining it may not.
If you can get a minimal reproducible test case that you could share that would
be fantastic!
Dave
> Deadlock during SPARQL execution on an inference model
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JENA-244
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-244
> Project: Apache Jena
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Jena
> Reporter: Stephen Owens
>
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
