Hi Andy, Thanks for raising JENA-963 for me - I'll raise the issues directly in the future. Sometimes it's hard to know whether things are intended (or at least accepted) behaviours though.
Unfortunately I haven't got an exhaustive set of queries we need to support; but we're basically hoping to have all arbitrary SPARQL 1.1 queries round-trip back to a query which is at least equivalent when evaluated on any complaint SPARQL 1.1 database to what went in. Most of the problems I've run into have been uncovered either by using it, writing unit tests for my domain code, by integration testing with some of our other components, or in this particular case by a colleague trying to generate some stats on data we have. Would every example query from the SPARQL 1.1 spec be a good start? http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/ I also have a small collection of about 28 different real world queries (mostly for handling RDF data cubes) which were generated via some of our systems that may be useful. If you'd like me to provide them as potential test cases I'm sure I can do that. R. On 15 June 2015 at 18:31, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Rick, > > Sorry, your not having a good time of it here. > > Not one but 2 related bugs (filter in wrong place, lost the aggregate > function) this time. HAVING is particularly hard because it isn't a simple > mapping to one algebra form. > > If split up: > -------------- > PREFIX qb: <http://purl.org/linked-data/cube#> > > SELECT ?obs (COUNT(?value) AS ?C) > WHERE > { ?obs a qb:Observation . > ?obs qb:measureType ?measure . > ?obs ?measure ?value > } > GROUP BY ?obs > HAVING ( ?C > 1 ) > -------------- > it goes wrong as well. > > I've recorded it as > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-963 > > A couple of things would be good: > > You can raise JIRA directly - I attached code to the JIRA like it was from > JENA-954. Prefixes etc. - query-in, query-out. > > What would be really good is fix the test coverage. "TestOpAsQuery" is > the test class. Do you have a complete (nearly complete ...) list of > features? What's missing in TestOpAsQuery? > > If we can get the coverage up, we'll be a better position long term. > > Andy > > > On 15/06/15 16:57, Rick Moynihan wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I've been using the recent fixes to ARQ (made in JENA-954) around >> rendering >> SPARQL queries and have encountered another problem where a valid query >> appears to roundtrip to an invalid one. >> >> The problematic query is this: >> >> SELECT ?obs >> WHERE { >> ?obs a qb:Observation ; >> qb:measureType ?measure ; >> ?measure ?value ; >> . >> } >> GROUP BY ?obs >> HAVING (COUNT(?value) > 1) >> >> Which generates this SSE: >> >> (project >> (?obs) >> (filter >> (> ?.0 1) >> (group >> (?obs) >> ((?.0 >> (count ?value))) >> (bgp >> (triple ?obs <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> < >> http://purl.org/linked-data/cube#Observation>) >> (triple ?obs <http://purl.org/linked-data/cube#measureType> >> ?measure) >> (triple ?obs ?measure ?value))))) >> >> But when round tripped back into SPARQL with OpAsQuery.asQuery, leads to >> this invalid query: >> >> SELECT ?obs >> WHERE >> { ?obs <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> >> qb:Observation . >> ?obs qb:measureType ?measure . >> ?obs ?measure ?value >> FILTER ( ?.0 > 1 ) >> } >> GROUP BY ?obs >> >> >> R. >> >>
