> Checking whether there is one first.

Ok, I'll do that

> The reality is also that your case seems to be a bit unuusal. To be 3.5s
> I'd guess you are hitting the POS (or quad equivalent) index cold. Or
> something else is interacting with it (named graphs+union?)

Yes, I noticed after my initial email that later queries run much
faster... now it's around 300ms which is much better. Still a bit slow
but manageable.

> Not everyone will be happy with the compromises necessary - it isn't
> make "normal cases work" (and, arguably, your case is not normal!),

Well... I understand, but I really think having this kind of
optimization (not just this specific one but implementing more of this
kind) would make SPARQL more attractive by making it looking more
production ready

> it's make other things stop working.
> e.g. The encoding of inline datetimes is only for CE (in fact years 0-7999).

I'm not sure I understand?

Best,
-- 
Elie

Reply via email to