hmm. 2.8.7. is the sparql 1.1 syntax different than that offered on
the arq aggregate page?

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Andy Seaborne
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> On 06/01/11 19:32, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>
>> With current ARQ, the default syntax didn't accept count. I set syntax
>> to ARQ and it worked. I'll change it to use the sparql 1.1 syntax
>> instead.
>
> In current ARQ (2.8.7) the default is SPARQL 1.1.
>
> If it works in the ARQ extended language and not in the default language,
> you mostly have an older version of ARQ on the classpath.
>
>        Andy
>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Andy Seaborne
>> <[email protected]>  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 06/01/11 18:47, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In my store I have (for purposes of discussion)
>>>>
>>>> one tuple S P O
>>>>
>>>> and then some number of quadlets on it.
>>>>
>>>> I want to find out how many.
>>>
>>> SELECT (Count(*) AS ?C)
>>> {
>>>   ?x rdf:subject S .
>>>   ?x rdf:predicate P .
>>>   ?x rdf:object O .
>>> }
>>>
>>> which assumes fully reified.
>>>
>>>> However, to make matters more complex, what I'd really like to do is
>>>> set up a construct query that finds
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> S (p1|p2|p3|p4...) O
>>>
>>> SELECT (Count(*) AS ?C)
>>> {
>>>   ?x rdf:subject S .
>>>   ?x rdf:predicate ?P .
>>>   ?x rdf:object O .
>>>   FILTER ( ?P IN ( p1, p2, p3, p4) )
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>>> and also then returns the count of quadlets for each of these it comes
>>>> up
>>>> with.
>>>
>>> Finding then counting, and finding and returning needs duplication of the
>>> thing.  It's a quirk in the whole relation algebra thing  - you can't
>>> assign
>>> subexpressions and reuse them - this is not unique to SPARQL.  To look at
>>> it
>>> another way, counting is destructive on the things being counted.
>>>
>>>> Is this plausible .... ? Obviously, I can do it by first finding the
>>>> statements and then going back and using the COUNT extension to do the
>>>> counting.
>>>
>>> COUNT isn't an extension - it's part of SPARQL 1.1
>>>
>>>> Is TDB particularly good or bad at this?
>>>
>>> It does not anything special but caching is your friend (and mime).
>>>
>>>        Andy
>>>
>

Reply via email to