Hoi,
This is the kind of (technical) feedback that makes sense as it is centred
on need. It acknowledges that more needs to be done as we are not ready for
what we expect of ourselves in the first place.
In this day and age of big data, we are a very public place where a lot of
initiatives gravitate to. If the WMF wants to retain its relevance, it is
to face its challenges. Maybe the WDQS can steal a page out of the
architecture in what Magnus build. It is very much replicable and multiple
instances have been running. This is not to say that it becomes more and
more relevant to have the Wikidata toolkit available from Labs with as many
instances as needed.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 12 February 2016 at 00:04, Stas Malyshev <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > We basically have two choices: either we offer a limited interface that
> only
> > allows for a narrow range of queries to be run at all. Or we offer a very
> > general interface that can run arbitrary queries, but we impose limits
> on time
> > and memory consumption. I would actually prefer the first option,
> because it's
> > more predictable, and doesn't get people's hopes up too far. What do you
> think?
>
> That would require implementing pretty smart SPARQL parser... I don't
> think it worth the investment of time. I'd rather put caps on runtime
> and maybe also on parallel queries per IP, to ensure fair access. We may
> also have a way to run longer queries - in fact, we'll need it anyway if
> we want to automate lists - but that is longer term, we'll need to
> figure out infrastructure for that and how we allocate access.
>
> --
> Stas Malyshev
> [email protected]
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
