Ok this works thanks a lot. I'm still testing the behaviour of transactions.
2013/5/13 "Dr. André Lanka" <[email protected]> > Hi, > > you could give > > TDB.getContext().set(SystemTDB.symFileMode, FileMode.direct); > > a shot. This forces the old (direct) file mode even on Java64 systems. > We use this too (because, the files in the other mode are too large for > us). We use it heavily with transaction and don't encounter abnormal > file sizes. Perhaps you have to rebuild the TDB store from scratch (in > direct mode of course) to get small tdb files. > > Greetings > André > > > On 13.05.2013 17:36, Frederic Toublanc wrote: > > Ok but is there a way to reconstruct the indexes to save some space. > > This size problem is just not acceptable. > > After adding 200 elements (2ko each in rdf format) the size of the TDB is > > 344mo ... Thats too much > > > > > > 2013/5/13 David Jordan <[email protected]> > > > >> TDB manages data on a block basis, I forget the specific size of the > >> block, but as I recall, the block size seemed relatively large to me. > Many > >> systems allow you to configure the block size, but it does not seem TDB > >> supports this. The other aspect to triple stores is that despite the > fact > >> that the schema is relatively simple, the data is extensively indexed, > the > >> indexes in some/all cases include all the data from the triple. So there > >> ends up being lots of data duplication. Since things are managed on a > block > >> basis, there could also be a possible issue with the amount of the > blocks > >> that are unused. > >> > >> If you intend to have multiple applications doing updates on the data, > you > >> must use transactions. > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Frederic Toublanc [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: Monday, May 13, 2013 10:44 AM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: Size of Jena TDB > >> > >> Ok i gave up with transaction. > >> > >> I still dont understand why the TDB is inscreasing to dramatically when > i > >> dont use transactions ... :( > >> > >> > >> 2013/5/13 Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> > >> > >>>> Why thoses changes solve the size problem ? > >>> > >>> Frederic, > >>> > >>> Which version are you running? > >>> > >>> We can't run your example because it is is tied to your application > >>> code so > >>> > >>> With the current 2.10.0 and previous 2.7.4 releases of Jena, nested > >>> write transactions on the same thread aren't allowed and it's checked > >> for: > >>> > >>> > >>> public static void main(String[] args) //throws Exception > >>> { > >>> Dataset ds = TDBFactory.createDataset() ; > >>> ds.begin(ReadWrite.WRITE) ; > >>> ds.begin(ReadWrite.WRITE) ; > >>> > >>> ds.commit() ; > >>> ds.commit() ; > >>> } > >>> > >>> throws an exception on the second .begin. > >>> > >>> Andy > >>> > >>> > >>> On 13/05/13 07:30, Frederic Toublanc wrote: > >>> > >>>> Anyway i still have a question. > >>>> > >>>> Here the changes : > >>>> > >>>> I addes the begin write transaction before calling getDefaultModel() > >>>> // Begin write transaction > >>>> ds.begin(ReadWrite.WRITE); > >>>> model = ds.getDefaultModel(); > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> At the end i close the connection as follow : > >>>> > >>>> // End transaction > >>>> ds.end(); > >>>> // Close the model > >>>> model.close(); > >>>> > >>>> // Close the dataset. > >>>> ds.close(); > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Same thing for retrieving data (before i didnt start and end any > >>>> transactions) so now : > >>>> > >>>> // Begin readtransaction > >>>> ds.begin(ReadWrite.READ); > >>>> model = ds.getDefaultModel(); > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> and i close it as follow at the end : > >>>> > >>>> // End transaction > >>>> ds.end(); > >>>> // Close the model > >>>> model.close(); > >>>> > >>>> // Close the dataset. > >>>> ds.close(); > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Why thoses changes solve the size problem ? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> 2013/5/10 Brian McBride <[email protected]> > >>>> > >>>> On 10/05/2013 15:29, Bill Roberts wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> I'm pretty confident that an empty TDB database does not occupy > >> 192MB. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> It does on a Mac - as explained in Andy's mail a little while > ago. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Gosh! I just reread Andy's message. Frederic says he is using > >>>>> Windows 7. > >>>>> > >>>>> Brian > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Not sure what OS Frederic is using. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> total 393216 > >>>>>> drwxr-xr-x 29 bill staff 986 10 May 15:27 ./ > >>>>>> drwxr-xr-x 19 bill staff 646 10 May 15:26 ../ > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 GOSP.dat > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 GOSP.idn > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 GPOS.dat > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 GPOS.idn > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 GSPO.dat > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 GSPO.idn > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 OSP.dat > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 OSP.idn > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 OSPG.dat > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 OSPG.idn > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 POS.dat > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 POS.idn > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 POSG.dat > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 POSG.idn > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 SPO.dat > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 SPO.idn > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 SPOG.dat > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 SPOG.idn > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 0 10 May 15:27 journal.jrnl > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 node2id.dat > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 node2id.idn > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 0 10 May 15:27 nodes.dat > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 prefix2id.dat > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 prefix2id.idn > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 prefixIdx.dat > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 8388608 10 May 15:27 prefixIdx.idn > >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 bill staff 0 10 May 15:27 prefixes.dat > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Epimorphics Ltd (http://www.epimorphics.com) > >>>>> > >>>>> Epimorphics Ltd. is a limited company registered in England (number > >>>>> 7016688) > >>>>> Registered address: Court Lodge, 105 High Street, Portishead, > >>>>> Bristol > >>>>> BS20 > >>>>> 6PT, UK > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > -- > Dr. André Lanka * 0178 / 134 44 47 * http://dr-lanka.de >
