Bart, You might want to look at SDB running on one of the relational databases that bluemix provides. Not a good solution in terms of high performance but one that should work.
Claude On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Bart van Leeuwen < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Andy, > > Thanks for the elaborate answer! > > The reason that I asked is that I'm still looking for a way to have triple > store with IBM Bluemix. > One of their lab offerings is Tinkerpop hence the question. > > For now I'm probably stuck with using a cloud based triple store like > Dydra, > or run my own server with a triple store in a cloud based VM > > Met Vriendelijke Groet / With Kind Regards > Bart van Leeuwen > > ############################################################## > # twitter: @semanticfire > # netage.nl > # http://netage.nl > # M.A. Reinaldaweg 79 > # 3461AJ Linschoten > # tel. +31(0)6-53182997 > ############################################################## > > > > From: Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Date: 21-08-2015 12:44 > Subject: Re: Apache Tinkerpop as Jena Backend ? > > > > On 19/08/15 16:14, Bart van Leeuwen wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Would it be possible to use Apache Tinkerpop [1] as a Jena backend ? > > > > [1] http://tinkerpop.incubator.apache.org/ > > > > Met Vriendelijke Groet / With Kind Regards > > Bart van Leeuwen > > Short answer : there isn't code to do it that I recall anyone talking > about. > > Long answer: [*] > > Property Graphs (PG) and RDF have a lot in common (obviously!). Using > one with the other would open some interesting possibilities. A > Gremlin+RDF-like traversal language would be great. > > In the direction "Jena over Tinkerpop" using a PG storage to put in RDF > looks OK if the fact that in PG values and links are separate c.f. > owl:DatatypeProperty and owl:ObjectProperty. > > If you have a schema, (and data that promised faithfully to follow the > schema:-)), then by knowing if a RDF property is a datatypeProperty or > an objectProperty, it looks quite easy to look in the right way to use > RDF on PG. Otherwise there is a risk of needing to look in two places, > which might work for many cases but the scale implications don't look > good. > > This gets to one key point - PG is not so much about data integration > later, whereas RDF is. Practically, to use PG, there is a data model > design step when setting up the database and it's done for the task, > leaving work later for integration conversion. > > Viewing an existing PG graph as RDF looks like more conversion is needed > - one PG edge or value might not be one RDF triple. if edge attributes > are being used or if multiple edges of the same name occur. > (not that edge attributes are necessarily good modelling in PG in > general - some useful cases, but the "email message sent" link is an > example of bad modelling). > > Its all about the details - using one with the other for a constrained > application where some compromises can be knowing made is very different > to having a complete implementation of one data model on the other. > > There is a related question of whether some of the tinkerpop technology > can be used to make a Jena backend and also whether TDB technology > (index code, transaction framework) would make a good substrate for > tinkerpop storage, or even the clustered version (Lizard). > > Andy > > [*] http://sched.co/3ztL > "A tale of two graphs: Property Graphs and RDF" > An ApacheCon BigData talk > with Paolo Castagna. > > Budapest, Monday, September 28 • 15:00 - 16:00 > > > > > -- I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web <http://like-like.xenei.com> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren
