Hey John,
I'm pretty sure your pull request was merged-- it was pulled in through another 
pull request.  If not, sorry-- I thought it had been merged and then just not 
closed.  I was going to spend some time doing merges tomorrow so I can get it 
tomorrow.  

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 23, 2017, at 8:13 PM, John Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> I have a pull request that fixes that problem.. it has been stuck in limbo
> for months.. https://github.com/apache/incubator-rya-site/pull/1  Can
> someone merge it into master?
> 
>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Liu, Eric <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> Cool, thanks for the help.
>> By the way, the link to the Rya Manual is outdated on the rya.apache.org
>> site. Should be pointing at https://github.com/apache/
>> incubator-rya/blob/master/extras/rya.manual/src/site/markdown/_index.md
>> 
>> On 2/23/17, 12:34 PM, "Aaron D. Mihalik" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>    deep vs wide:
>> 
>>    A property path query is probably your best bet.  Something like:
>> 
>>    for the following data:
>> 
>>    s:EventA p:causes s:EventB
>>    s:EventB p:causes s:EventC
>>    s:EventC p:causes s:EventD
>> 
>> 
>>    This query would start at EventB and work it's way up and down the
>> chain:
>> 
>>    SELECT * WHERE {
>>       <s:EventB> (<p:causes>|^<p:causes>)* ?s . ?s ?p ?o
>>    }
>> 
>> 
>>    On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 2:58 PM Meier, Caleb <[email protected]>
>>    wrote:
>> 
>>> Yes, that's a good place to start.  If you have external timestamps
>> that
>>> are built into your graph using the time ontology in owl (e.g you
>> have
>>> triples of the form (event123, time:inDateTime, 2017-02-23T14:29)),
>> the
>>> temporal index is exactly what you want.  If you are hoping to query
>> based
>>> on the internal timestamps that Accumulo assigns to your triples,
>> then
>>> there are some slight tweaks that can be done to facilitate this,
>> but it
>>> won't be nearly as efficient (this will require some sort of client
>> side
>>> filtering).
>>> 
>>> Caleb A. Meier, Ph.D.
>>> Software Engineer II ♦ Analyst
>>> Parsons Corporation
>>> 1911 N. Fort Myer Drive, Suite 800 ♦ Arlington, VA 22209
>>> Office:  (703)797-3066 <(703)%20797-3066>
>>> [email protected] ♦ www.parsons.com
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Liu, Eric [mailto:[email protected]]
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 2:27 PM
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Subject: Re: Timestamps and Cardinality in Queries
>>> 
>>> We’d like to be able to query by timestamp; specifically, we want to
>> be
>>> able to find all statements that were made within a given time
>> range. Is
>>> this what I should be looking at?
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__cwiki.
>> apache.org_confluence_download_attachments_63407907_
>> Rya-2520Temporal-2520Indexing.pdf-3Fversion-3D1-26modificationDate-
>> 3D1464789502000-26api-3Dv2&d=CwIGaQ&c=Nwf-pp4xtYRe0sCRVM8_
>> LWH54joYF7EKmrYIdfxIq10&r=vuVdzYC2kksVZR5STiFwDpzJ7CrMHCgeo_4WXTD0qo8&m=
>> BBheKpKX7A1Ijs8q_TDEUVtdfu-r015XHZjmcw6veAw&s=vLayAkLG0IKGE-
>> 0NbwRQKfpcfId05fXE5TX8oMJaa7Q&e=
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 2/22/17, 6:21 PM, "Meier, Caleb" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>    Hey Eric,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>    Currently timestamps can't be queried in Rya.  Do you need to be
>> able
>>> to query by timestamp, or simply discover the timestamp for a given
>> node?
>>> Rya does have a temporal index, but that requires you to use a
>> temporal
>>> ontology to model the temporal properties of your graph nodes.
>>> 
>>>    ________________________________________
>>> 
>>>    From: Liu, Eric <[email protected]>
>>> 
>>>    Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 6:38 PM
>>> 
>>>    To: [email protected]
>>> 
>>>    Subject: Timestamps and Cardinality in Queries
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>    Hi,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>    Continuing from our talk earlier today I was wondering if you
>> could
>>> provide more information about how timestamps could be queried in
>> Rya.
>>> 
>>>    Also, we are trying to support a type of query that would
>> essentially
>>> be limiting on cardinality (different from the normal SPARQL limit
>> because
>>> it’s for node cardinality rather than total results). I saw in one of
>>> Caleb’s talks that Rya’s query optimization involves checking
>> cardinality
>>> first. I was wondering if there would be some way to tap into this
>> feature
>>> for usage in queries?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>    Thanks,
>>> 
>>>    Eric Liu
>>> 
>>>    ________________________________________________________
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>    The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and/or
>>> proprietary to Capital One and/or its affiliates and may only be used
>>> solely in performance of work or services for Capital One. The
>> information
>>> transmitted herewith is intended only for use by the individual or
>> entity
>>> to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the
>> intended
>>> recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission,
>>> dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of, or taking of
>> any
>>> action in reliance upon this information is strictly prohibited. If
>> you
>>> have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
>> and
>>> delete the material from your computer.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ________________________________________________________
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and/or
>>> proprietary to Capital One and/or its affiliates and may only be used
>>> solely in performance of work or services for Capital One. The
>> information
>>> transmitted herewith is intended only for use by the individual or
>> entity
>>> to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the
>> intended
>>> recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission,
>>> dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of, or taking of
>> any
>>> action in reliance upon this information is strictly prohibited. If
>> you
>>> have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
>> and
>>> delete the material from your computer.
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ________________________________________________________
>> 
>> The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and/or
>> proprietary to Capital One and/or its affiliates and may only be used
>> solely in performance of work or services for Capital One. The information
>> transmitted herewith is intended only for use by the individual or entity
>> to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended
>> recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission,
>> dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of, or taking of any
>> action in reliance upon this information is strictly prohibited. If you
>> have received this communication in error, please contact the sender and
>> delete the material from your computer.
>> 

Reply via email to