On Thursday, November 13, 2014 1:11:47 PM UTC+2, Niclas Hoyer wrote: > > Fuseki uses ~ 9 GB disk space after import, but Neo4j allocated 390 GB. > That also results in about 27 times slower query execution on this large > dataset. > I suspect some data modelling issue here... the difference is way bigger than one can expect. Factor of 10 won't make me wonder too much, but 40+ ?? why and how?
Using the smallest dataset with just 2 MB Neo4j is just 2.4 times slower > than Fuseki. > This also makes me wonder, does Neo4j introduce so big an overhead compared to Fuseki? (small example should completely fit in memory, doesn't it?) WBR, Andrii -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Neo4j" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
