Hi,

Please find the requested details as below:

Dataset - TDB2 Dataset
Fuseki configuration- I am using the same index config file to start fuseki
server. What do you mean by fuseki configuration sorry I am not getting it.
number of results of the query - There are 11 triples getting returned from
above query

Thanks and Regards,
Deepali

On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 5:02 PM Lorenz Buehmann <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Ok, thanks for sharing the spreadsheet.
>
> We need more configuration infos: dataset, Fuseki configuration, number
> of results of the query.
>
> We didn't get  the attachment of the assembler config.
>
> With no optimizer used, the text:query triple pattern should be
> evaluated first - and depending on the number of matching literals,
> faster than a scan with filter. But it depends. Also not sure if
> text:query is preferred in query optimization, but I think so. Andy
> knows better indeed
>
> On 04.01.21 12:11, Deepali Singhavi wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Sample size means number of triples?
> >
> > I have tried with 6000,40000,50000 and even with 1,00,000 triples.
> > Please find the performance report attached with this email.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Deepali
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 1:03 PM Lorenz Buehmann
> > <[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> >     What is the sample size here? I mean, for a low number of literals
> >     it's
> >     obvious that String containment check in Java isn't that slow. The
> >     difference will most likely come from a large scan over literals with
> >     containment check whereas with a Lucene index - which is basically an
> >     inverted index - it's obviously more efficient to lookup terms for
> the
> >     documents.
> >
> >     On 04.01.21 05:56, Deepali Singhavi wrote:
> >     > Hi,
> >     >
> >     > I am trying to implement indexing for Fuseki using
> >     > Lucene/ElasticSearch using an assembler configuration file
> >     (attaching
> >     > file for reference) but there is no improvement in performance
> >     > (performance without index is better than with index).
> >     >
> >     > I am using sample data from *films.ttl* file.
> >     >
> >     > *Sample Query *
> >     > PREFIX text: <http://jena.apache.org/text#>
> >     > PREFIX rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>
> >     > select ?subject ?object
> >     > WHERE {
> >     > # Without Index
> >     > #?subject rdfs:label ?object .
> >     > #FILTER contains(?object,"City")
> >     > #With Index
> >     > ?subject text:query (rdfs:label "city").
> >     > ?subject rdfs:label ?object .
> >     > }
> >     >
> >     > *Performance:*
> >     >
> >     > No of Triples
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > No of Runs
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > Without Index
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > Lucene Index
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > ElasticSearch Index
> >     >
> >     > 6918
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 1
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 16ms
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 18ms
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 19ms
> >     >
> >     > 2
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 29ms
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 32ms
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 32ms
> >     >
> >     > 3
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 22ms
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 23ms
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 21ms
> >     >
> >     > 4
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 22ms
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 14ms
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 53ms
> >     >
> >     > 5
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 15ms
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 19ms
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > 18ms
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > Please let me know if any other information is required from my
> side
> >     > and please suggest how I can improve performance.
> >     >
> >     > Regards,
> >     > Deepali
> >     >
> >
>

Reply via email to