If we take this to the Java environment for a moment, you can read/write directly to the jena database using the java classes. I suppose you could set this up to call it from PHP/Python.
HOWEVER, and it is a big however, there are synchronization (read/write) issues with doing this. Fuseki has the code to ensure that the synchronization is handled correctly. In addition, I have found recently that the RDFConnection class makes it much easier to write code that will run against both a local and a remote system. My suggestion is that if you are going to do this, explore the Fuseki code and understand how it does locking etc. It has been awhile since I was down in that code and what I remember may have changed. YMMV. Claude On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:35 AM, Laura Morales <laure...@mail.com> wrote: > I forgot to mention that I'm not looking at this from the perspective of a > user who wants to use a public endpoint. I'm looking at this from the > perspective of a developer making a website and using Jena/Fuseki as a > non-public backend database. > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2018 at 8:29 AM > From: "Laura Morales" <laure...@mail.com> > To: users@jena.apache.org > Cc: users@jena.apache.org > Subject: Re: client/server communication protocol > Am not saying one is better or worse than the other, I'm merely trying to > understand. If I understand correctly Fuseki is responsible for handling > connections, after then it passes my query to Jena which essentially will > parse my query and retrieve the data from a memory mapped file (TDB). > Since MySQL/Postgres use a custom binary protocol, I'm simply asking > myself if HTTP adds too much overhead and latency (and therefore is > significantly slower when dealing with a lot of requests) compared to a > custom protocol programmed on a lower level socket. > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2018 at 8:11 AM > From: "Lorenz Buehmann" <buehm...@informatik.uni-leipzig.de> > To: users@jena.apache.org > Subject: Re: client/server communication protocol > Well, Fuseki is exactly the HTTP layer on top of Jena. Without Fuseki, > which protocol do you want to use to communicate with Jena? The SPARQL > protocol [1] perfectly standardizes the communication via HTTP. Without > Fuseki, who should do the HTTP handling? Clearly, you could setup your > own Java server and do all the communication by yourself, e.g. using low > level sockets etc. - whether this makes sense, I don't know. I'd always > prefer standards, especially if you already have something like Fuseki > which does all the connection handling. > > > [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-http-rdf-update/ > -- I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web <http://like-like.xenei.com> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren
