Hopefully, Fuseki2 is compatible with Fuseki1 configurations - it's
supposed to be anyway.
At some point (no plans), Fuseki1 is end-of-life. Currently, it's only
getting maintenance.
Fuseki2 runs as a service much better.
And as a WAR file.
On 28/03/16 12:45, Steinar Bang wrote:
Hi,
I have an installation that is currently using (as near as I can tell)
Jena Fuseki 1.1, which is a bit out of date.
Going forward, should I would it be best to replace it with Jena Fuseki
1.3.1 or with Jena Fuseki 2.3.1?
By best, I'm thinking of
- performance?
- In particular SPARQL query perfomance
Makes no difference - same query engine.
- compatibility?
There are better ways to configure Fuseki2 but --conf and the other
command line arguments work.
- REST endpoint compatibility? (that may be determined by the SPARQL
protocol...?)
Fuseki2 is better at a bit better at compliance than Fuseki1 (more
complete) and supports normal REST operations on the dataset itself.
For query/update Fuseki2 is compatible with Fuseki1.
- Directory layout compatibility? (I know this is different)
It does have it's own "run" area. That's part of being more OS-service
oriented.
- TDB compatibility
Same TDB.
Thanks!
- Steinar
Andy
