[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1187?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15312107#comment-15312107
]
ASF subversion and git services commented on JENA-1187:
-------------------------------------------------------
Commit 363287f23ce4c5e93df74a76bd826090001126e2 in jena's branch
refs/heads/master from [~andy.seaborne]
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=jena.git;h=363287f ]
JENA-1187: Correct scope calculation for OpUnion
> Wrong results/performance regression when using BIND and graph pattern groups
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JENA-1187
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-1187
> Project: Apache Jena
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: ARQ
> Affects Versions: Jena 3.1.0, Fuseki 2.4.0
> Reporter: Eetu Mäkelä
>
> I've been using SPARQL queries with BINDs and/or VALUESs that precede UNION
> blocks. These used to work efficiently (at least in Jena 2 times) with the
> bound value being bound also in the subpattern, but no longer do. In
> addition, at certain times, they produce nonsensical results. For example,
> the below returns {{rdf:type}} statements in the dataset without any regard
> to ?cl:
> {code}
> SELECT * {
> {
> BIND("nonexistant" AS ?cl)
> {
> BIND(?cl AS ?cl2)
> ?c a ?cl2 .
> } UNION {
> BIND(?cl AS ?cl2)
> ?c a ?cl2 .
> }
> }
> }
> LIMIT 10
> {code}
> while if you change _just one_ of the subpatterns in the union to directly
> refer to ?cl, it returns an empty result set:
> {code}
> SELECT * {
> {
> BIND("nonexistant" AS ?cl)
> {
> BIND(?cl AS ?cl2)
> ?c a ?cl .
> } UNION {
> BIND(?cl AS ?cl2)
> ?c a ?cl2 .
> }
> }
> }
> LIMIT 10
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
