All of the features in the indexing project are nice to have, but even without them Rya still offers the functionality most people expect from a triple store. Since I believe that having a release sooner rather than later is more important now, Puja's plan with having option 1 for the first release and option 2 for longer term sounds good to me.
Thanks, Adina On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Puja Valiyil <[email protected]> wrote: > Sure -- > The indexing project includes the following optional features: > 1. Temporal indexing > 2. Free Text indexing > 3. Pre-computed joins > 4. Geo Indexing > 5. Entity Centric Index > > The main thing to keep in mind is that for all of these features, a user > has to explicitly turn them on in the configuration, by default all of > these indexing strategies are turned off. > For optional 1, a user could still manually build the indexing project and > all of its dependencies, so there would be a straight forward path for > enabling the functionality. The artifacts would not be on apache's > nexus/maven central/where ever we deploy Rya artifacts to. > > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Adina Crainiceanu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Puja, can you please detail what options are in the indexing project (for > > option 1)? As Andrew asked, are pre-computed indices part of that > project? > > How about the entity-centric index? And is it correct that if we go with > > option 1, there is still a reasonably easy way for people interested in > the > > "optional" parts to include them? > > > > Thanks, > > Adina > > > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Smith, Andrew < > [email protected] > > > > > wrote: > > > > > Wouldn't that also take out precomputed joins? And are we absolutely > > > sure we don't want indexing? It seems important, couldn't we make geo > > > optional? > > > > > > Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device > > > > > > ------ Original message------ > > > From: Puja Valiyil > > > Date: Thu, Oct 6, 2016 10:52 AM > > > To: [email protected]; > > > Cc: > > > Subject:[DISCUSS] Path forward for release > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > Talking with Aaron, it seems like there were two paths forward for > > > refactoring in order to create a release. To refresh everyone's > memory, > > > the issue was that the geo-indexing extensions to Rya pull in geotools, > > > which prohibits us from releasing Rya under an Apache 2 license. There > > may > > > be some more particulars that I'm glossing over -- someone please chime > > in > > > if they feel it is key to the discussion. > > > The two paths forward we had were: > > > 1. Make all of the indexing project and its downstream dependencies > > > optional and exclude them from a release > > > -- The indexing project includes several "optional" extensions to Rya > > > (advanced indexing strategies). Prior to Rya becoming an apache > project, > > > these indexing extensions were optional and there was a separate > profile > > > for including them. This option involves reverting back to that > mindset. > > > The main argument against this is that these indexing > > strategies/extensions > > > are not in fact optional but are "core" to Rya and can't be excluded. > > > > > > 2. Refactor Rya to pull geoindexing into a separate project and > exclude > > > that project from the release. > > > - We could refactor Rya to have geoindexing be its own project and add > a > > > profile to include that in the build. This would invovle moving the > > class > > > mvm.rya.indexing.GeoIndexer and packages mem.rya.indexing.accumulo.geo > > and > > > mvm.rya.indexing.mongodb.geo to a separate project and then > > removing/moving > > > references to geoindexing anywhere else. Another option is to refactor > > the > > > GeoIndexer interface to remove the geotools dependency. > > > > > > I think #1 is a good immediate path for a release and that #2 is a good > > > longer term path forward. Since it's probably in our best interests > as a > > > community to get an apache release sooner rather than later, I'd rather > > us > > > go with #1 since it would quicker. I also think that most users of Rya > > > would be ok with excluding the indexing project since it is not core > > > functionality for Rya. While #2 is a better long term plan, it > involves > > > some pretty extensive refactoring that would be difficult to do well > in a > > > timely manner. > > > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Dr. Adina Crainiceanu > > Associate Professor, Computer Science Department > > United States Naval Academy > > 410-293-6822 > > [email protected] > > http://www.usna.edu/Users/cs/adina/ > > > -- Dr. Adina Crainiceanu Associate Professor, Computer Science Department United States Naval Academy 410-293-6822 [email protected] http://www.usna.edu/Users/cs/adina/
