Hello, today I tried to verify if using a database instead of Pilog facts would speed up my processing. While trying this, I stumbled over the following. Suppose:
(pool test) (class +Test +Entity) (rel id (+Ref +String)) (rel src (+Ref +String)) (rel tgt (+Ref +String)) (new '(+Test) 'id "1" 'src A 'tgt B) (new '(+Test) 'id "11" 'src B 'tgt "C") (new '(+Test) 'id "111" 'src C 'tgt "D") (commit) (? (db id +Test 1 @E) (show @E)) The last Pilog query will successively return three answers where I thought to get only one. I understand, why 'db' will deliver three results. But the question comes up, how I could formulate the query using only exact matches! Without this, the 'db' query would return similar matches that I have to explicitely guarding against with e.g. 'equal' like this: (? (db id +Test "1" @E) (val @Id @E id) (equal @Id "1") (show @E)) But this would defeat the reason, why I tried to use a DB at all. I hoped that accessing an Edge via an index would be faster than asking Pilog to match against all its facts until it found a corresponding it could unify against. So could this be the reason that my DB solution of traversing all ways thru a graph is a lot slower than using Pilog facts? Both are trying to iterate over the same graph built by 362 edges. Whereas the Pilog facts will allow for finding ca. 1000 ways per 1-2 seconds, the database solution was canceled after some time, as it did not reach the first 1000 solutions before I lost my patience ;-) Or is there any way to improve the performance of the DB? For instance by only matching exactly in the db query for a certain edge? Thanks and Ciao, cle. -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
