Hello Alexandr, In current version, there's no good way to specify an OFFSET without LIMIT for an arbitrary query, because LIMIT and OFFSET were considered parts of splitting output to pages.
The error diagnostics is misleading, maybe that will be improved. Best Regards, Ivan Mikhailov OpenLink Software http://virtuoso.openlinksw.com On Sat, 2010-05-15 at 16:56 +0700, Aleksandr A. Zaripov wrote: > Hello > > I'm using VOS 06.01.3127 x64 and it seems to me, I found a bug with > ORDER BY - LIMIT - OFFSET options > > For example, the query > > SELECT DISTINCT ?s ?p ?o WHERE {?s ?p ?o} ORDER BY ?p > > successfully returns all (about 3,7k) triples, ordered by predicate. > > But the query > > SELECT DISTINCT ?s ?p ?o WHERE {?s ?p ?o} ORDER BY ?p OFFSET 10 > > returns an error: > 22023 Error SR353: Sorted TOP clause specifies more then -2147483639 > rows to sort. Only 10000 are allowed. Either decrease the offset > and/or row count or use a scrollable cursor > > SPARQL query: > define sql:signal-void-variables 1 select distinct ?s ?p ?o where > {?s ?p ?o} order by ?p offset 10 > > Therefore, the query > > SELECT DISTINCT ?s ?p ?o WHERE {?s ?p ?o} ORDER BY ?p OFFSET 10 > LIMIT 9990 > > successfully returns previous 3.7k triples, except first 10. > > The http://dbpedia.org/sparql endpoint also returns the similar error > to query like this > > SELECT DISTINCT ?x WHERE {?x a > <http://sw.opencyc.org/2008/06/10/concept/Mx4rv6KsE5wpEbGdrcN5Y29ycA>} > ORDER BY ?x OFFSET 2 > > Best regards, Alexander Zaripov > [email protected] >
