no, I meant the whole content of the file not just the Fuseki part which
by the way as you can see just contains comments

On 06.01.21 15:28, Deepali Singhavi wrote:
> Hi Lorenz,
>
> Please find the content of my configuration file and hope this is what you
> are looking for.
>
> But I am using the same index.ttl file to start my fuseki server using
> below command.
>
> java -Xmx1200M -jar fuseki-server.jar --config=*LunceneIndex.ttl*
>
> # Licensed under the terms of http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>
> ## Fuseki Server configuration file.
>
> @prefix :        <#> .
> @prefix fuseki:  <http://jena.apache.org/fuseki#> .
> @prefix rdf:     <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
> @prefix rdfs:    <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
> @prefix ja:      <http://jena.hpl.hp.com/2005/11/Assembler#> .
>
> [] rdf:type fuseki:Server ;
>    # Example::
>    # Server-wide query timeout.
>    #
>    # Timeout - server-wide default: milliseconds.
>    # Format 1: "1000" -- 1 second timeout
>    # Format 2: "10000,60000" -- 10s timeout to first result,
>    #                            then 60s timeout for the rest of query.
>    #
>    # See javadoc for ARQ.queryTimeout for details.
>    # This can also be set on a per dataset basis in the dataset assembler.
>    #
>    # ja:context [ ja:cxtName "arq:queryTimeout" ;  ja:cxtValue "30000" ] ;
>
>    # Add any custom classes you want to load.
>    # Must have a "public static void init()" method.
>    # ja:loadClass "your.code.Class" ;
>
>    # End triples.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Deepali
>
>    .
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 6:49 PM Lorenz Buehmann <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 06.01.21 13:33, Deepali Singhavi wrote:
>>> 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.
>> The config file for Fuseki which contains your text index config. In a
>> first glance this is the Fuseki config, not a Lucene config. The
>> App-Assembler file. Please post it here as content if the attachment
>> doesn't work.
>>> 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