Hi, I am seeing a lot of these in catalina.out:
ERROR IN PREDICATE STATISTICS: 3546128 15939569 0, size = [D@4426e447 ERROR IN PREDICATE STATISTICS: 3546176 15939569 0, size = [D@55551445 ERROR IN PREDICATE STATISTICS: 3546307 15939569 0, size = [D@44a5e9c7 ERROR IN PREDICATE STATISTICS: 3546399 15939569 0, size = [D@68972b06 ERROR IN PREDICATE STATISTICS: 3546463 15939569 0, size = [D@1c89cc8f ERROR IN PREDICATE STATISTICS: 3546546 15939569 0, size = [D@1ad4ceec ERROR IN PREDICATE STATISTICS: 3546561 15939569 0, size = [D@95cf5b7 ERROR IN PREDICATE STATISTICS: 3546592 15939569 0, size = [D@3607c62e ERROR IN PREDICATE STATISTICS: 3546607 15939569 0, size = [D@386411b8 ERROR IN PREDICATE STATISTICS: 3546663 15939569 0, size = [D@31c763f4 ERROR IN PREDICATE STATISTICS: 3546677 15939569 0, size = [D@197341b4 ERROR IN PREDICATE STATISTICS: 3546773 15939569 0, size = [D@5dde9d79 ERROR IN PREDICATE STATISTICS: 3546947 15939569 0, size = [D@4234a314 What do these mean? More importantly, how do I fix them? I'm running OWLIM 5.2.5512-20120921122819, JRE_HOME jdk1.6.0_32, Tomcat 6.0.35, CentOS with kernel Linux 2.6.18-194.el5 #1 SMP Fri Apr 2 14:58:14 EDT 2010 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux. Thanks for your help Simon Rakov -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Confidentiality Notice: This message is private and may contain confidential and proprietary information. If you have received this message in error, please notify us and remove it from your system and note that you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Any unauthorized use or disclosure of the contents of this message is not permitted and may be unlawful. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Barry Bishop Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 6:23 PM To: [email protected]; Pavel Mička Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Owlim-discussion] OWLIM ignores binding Hi Pavel, Rob, So it seems this is correct behaviour after all. Perhaps I was too quick to assume something was wrong. I think for anyone used to SQL then it just seems wrong, but is in fact correct. Thanks for spotting this, Rob. And thanks for raising awareness, Pavel. All the best, barry On 24/09/12 18:34, Rob Vesse wrote: > I believe this is in fact the correct behavior and in line with the > specification, see > http://answers.semanticweb.com/questions/17410/semantics-of-sparql-aggregat > es for a recent discussion on this with an explanation from Andy Seaborne > of the working group as to why this is correct behavior > > The specific example there was a query with MAX but the same argument > applies here (in fact his argument does include treatment of COUNT) > > Rob > > > > On 9/24/12 1:46 AM, "Barry Bishop" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Pavel, >> >> Yes, the issue does seem to be in Sesame. I have raised this issue: >> >> http://www.openrdf.org/issues/browse/SES-1108 >> >> I expect it will be taken care of fairly soon. >> >> Thanks for letting us know. >> >> barry >> >> Barry Bishop >> OWLIM Product Manager >> Ontotext AD >> Tel: +43 650 2000 237 >> email: [email protected] >> skype: bazbishop >> www.ontotext.com >> >> On 24/09/12 10:17, Pavel Mička wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have found the issue, which is probably in sesame. When I execute >>> the query, but the knowledge base does not contain any axiom, it >>> returns only the value from the aggregation (0) as a result. Which is >>> quite unexpected, as it (in my humble opinion) should return no result >>> (empty result set). When the query is executed and data are present, >>> than it works as expected. >>> >>> Pavel >>> >>> >>> Dne 24.9.2012 8:22, Barry Bishop napsal(a): >>>> Hello Pavel, >>>> >>>> Can you provide some more details, please? >>>> >>>> Do you mean that you see the expected variable names when calling >>>> TupleQueryResult.getBindingNames(), but that calls to >>>> TupleQueryResult.next().getBindingNames() do not have the expected >>>> variable names? Is this true for every BindingSet? >>>> >>>> Best >>>> barry >>>> >>>> Barry Bishop >>>> OWLIM Product Manager >>>> Ontotext AD >>>> Tel: +43 650 2000 237 >>>> email: [email protected] >>>> skype: bazbishop >>>> www.ontotext.com >>>> >>>> On 12/09/12 10:47, Pavel Mička wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I am using OWLIM-Lite edition (5.2.5331, Sesame 2.6.8) and I am >>>>> querying the system using the following SPARQL query: >>>>> >>>>> PREFIX owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> >>>>> PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> >>>>> PREFIX rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> >>>>> PREFIX odra: >>>>> <http://kbss.felk.cvut.cz/ontologies/2012/OdraOntology.owl/> >>>>> >>>>> SELECT ?type (COUNT(DISTINCT ?instance) AS ?count) WHERE { >>>>> ?instance odra:hasType ?type . >>>>> } >>>>> GROUP BY ?type >>>>> >>>>> In BindingSet I expect 2 bindings (type, count), however the result >>>>> contains only count. But the TupleQueryResult contains (correctly) >>>>> both of them. >>>>> >>>>> Am I missing something or is this a bug? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> >>>>> Pavel Mička >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Owlim-discussion mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://ontomail.semdata.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion >> _______________________________________________ >> Owlim-discussion mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://ontomail.semdata.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion _______________________________________________ Owlim-discussion mailing list [email protected] http://ontomail.semdata.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion _______________________________________________ Owlim-discussion mailing list [email protected] http://ontomail.semdata.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion
