Hi,

I do have context indices enabled.  Sizes:

Pcos hits:  53663768
Pcso hits:  20127229
Pos hits:   482282752
Pso hits:   32098277
PL hits:    50179

It looks like pos is much larger than pcos or pso.  PL (Predicate Lists) is 
tiny.

How do I rebuild the indexes?  Please send me a list of steps.  

Thanks
Simon


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: damyan [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 11:10 AM
To: Rakov, Simon
Cc: Barry Bishop; [email protected]; Pavel Mička; 
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [Owlim-discussion] ERROR IN PREDICATE STATISTICS

Hi Simon,

this is a message received when we detected a mismatch during estimation 
of the query complexity for a particular statement pattern. And more 
specifically when the collection size per that statement pattern is 
calculated to be 0 but we found at least one statement satisfying the 
pattern.
As a possible cause - there could be several but most likely one of the 
indices is in inconsistent state (or have partial data).

Could you check if you are using context indices and the size of 
these(pcso for instance) is close by (at same order) as for pso/pos ...

It could be easily caused when repository is initialized with context 
indices enabled - then initialized without them but some data is added 
and then these are again re-enabled. In such scenario, the third time 
you initialize the repository it will find and use the old context 
indices but they will not have the data from the previous updates, when 
they were switched off since these were not maintained when switched off.

one way to recover is to rebuild them.

HTH
Damyan Ognyanov
Ontotext AD.

On 9/25/2012 5:26 PM, Rakov, Simon wrote:
> 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

_______________________________________________
Owlim-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
http://ontomail.semdata.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/owlim-discussion

Reply via email to