On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Andrea Splendiani <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I think that some caching with a minimum of query rewriting would get read of > 90% of the select{?s ?p ?o} where {?s?p ?o} queries. > > From a user perspective, I would rather have a clear result code upfront > telling me: your query is to heavy, not enough resources and so on, than > partial results + extra codes. I won't do much of partial results anyway... > so it's time wasted both sides. > > One empiric solution could be to assign a quota per requesting IP (or other > form of identification). Then one could restrict the total amount of resource > per time-frame, possibly with smart policies. It would also avoid people > breaking big queries in many small ones... > > But I was wondering: why is resource consumption a problem for sparql > endpoint providers, and not for other "providers" on the web ? (say, YouTube, > Google, ...). > Is it the unpredictability of the resources needed ? >
I've been exploring both 4store clustering http://4store.org/publications/harris-ssws09.pdf and using concurrent Erlang (OTP). I've not found much in the Erlang realm (if anyone has knowledge please let me know). 4store looks promising. > best, > Andrea
