On 01/09/2019 10:56, Brian McBride wrote:
On 31/08/2019 21:51, Andy Seaborne wrote:
[...]
From what to what?
Are you mixing Fuseki Main (FusekiMainCmd) with Fuseki Full
(FusekiCmd) packagings / running a 3.9.0 script with your new build?
Yes. I dropped the newly built
I've just spotted something in the documentation that means this
discussion is going to get a little more complicated.
I will therefore start a separate thread.
Brian
On 31/08/2019 22:40, Chris Tomlinson wrote:
Hi Brian,
The Lucene version changed in 3.10.0 to 7.4 from 6.4 in 3.9.0 (and
On 31/08/2019 21:51, Andy Seaborne wrote:
[...]
From what to what?
Are you mixing Fuseki Main (FusekiMainCmd) with Fuseki Full
(FusekiCmd) packagings / running a 3.9.0 script with your new build?
Yes. I dropped the newly built fuseki-server.jar into the directory
installed from 3.9.0
Hi Chris,
Thank you for responding.
On 31/08/2019 22:40, Chris Tomlinson wrote:
Hi Brian,
The Lucene version changed in 3.10.0 to 7.4 from 6.4 in 3.9.0 (and earlier). I
don’t think this has anything to do with the problem though.
I’m surprised that the query you indicate works in 3.9.0. It
Hi Brian,
The Lucene version changed in 3.10.0 to 7.4 from 6.4 in 3.9.0 (and earlier). I
don’t think this has anything to do with the problem though.
I’m surprised that the query you indicate works in 3.9.0. It looks like what’s
intended is a phrase query but it needs to be surrounded by
On 31/08/2019 21:08, Brian McBride wrote:
Hi Andy,
I have tried out my build of pull request #595. I installed it on our
dev server (by replacing the fuseki-server.jar in 3.9.0 installation).
There is good news and some not so good news.
The good news is this nicely addresses the issue
Hi Andy,
I have tried out my build of pull request #595. I installed it on our
dev server (by replacing the fuseki-server.jar in 3.9.0 installation).
There is good news and some not so good news.
The good news is this nicely addresses the issue I raised in this email
thread. I was able to
> > I see, thanks for the answer! There seem be some way to have a timeout
> > in the Lucene API, but it doesn't look very straightforward... should
> > I open a separate issue to track that?
>
> Yes
Ok, I'll do that
> Are you able to contribute for this additional feature?
Perhaps in the
On 30/08/2019 11:57, Élie Roux wrote:
Hi all,
It is "graceful termination" - the query engine checks whether the
timeout has gone off, not have something interrupt a thread.
Looking at the code, the Lucene call is returning an array of ScoreDocs
in one go so that is going to all happen.
On 29/08/2019 08:53, Élie Roux wrote:
Dear All,
We actually have a very similar plan:
- an endpoint for general queries, with a shortish timeout
- an endpoint for admin queries, with a much longer one, using the same dataset
The first thing I wanted to know is if and how Fuseki can be asked
> * I'm not familiar with the process - did I have to do my own build -
> or was their somewhere I could have pulled a ready built war file?
Until it is merged, that's the way to do it.
The flow is
* submit pull request
* merge
* builds (Java 8 (15mins polling), Java 11, Java 14 (once a day))
Thanks for the update.
I have done a build* based on the pull request and will try it out in a
test environment, hopefully in the next few days.
I have one comment on the documentation (after a preliminary read).
Where it says
[[
The context is the merge of the server's context, any
Dear All,
We actually have a very similar plan:
- an endpoint for general queries, with a shortish timeout
- an endpoint for admin queries, with a much longer one, using the same dataset
The first thing I wanted to know is if and how Fuseki can be asked to
completely stop a query thread (the
Code:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/595
Documentation draft (temp location):
https://gist.github.com/afs/1d4c6584723b72c5e7b892057029a8f4
Andy
On 06/08/2019 15:00, Brian McBride wrote:
Hi Andy,
That looks good. I'd be happy to help test it out when you get to that
point.
Brian
Hi Andy,
That looks good. I'd be happy to help test it out when you get to that
point.
Brian
On 05/08/2019 17:56, Andy Seaborne wrote:
Hi Brian,
There is work-in-progress to improve configuration : JENA-1731. This
includes setting context on endpoint and dataset as well as server.
Hi Brian,
There is work-in-progress to improve configuration : JENA-1731. This
includes setting context on endpoint and dataset as well as server.
Andy
On 05/08/2019 13:57, Brian McBride wrote:
I have just had a problem with query timeout overrides when upgrading to
Fuseki 3.12.0. I
I have just had a problem with query timeout overrides when upgrading to
Fuseki 3.12.0. I think the issue is related to JENA-1620 [1] which was
deployed with Jena 3.10.0.
Essentially, JENA-1620 modified the query timeout override functionality
to constrain timeout overrides so that they must
17 matches
Mail list logo
