On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Fabian Groffen Fabian.Groffen@cwi.nl wrote:
On 18-02-2011 15:27:02 +0200, Babis Nikolaou wrote:
why would you drop it?
Because, it may be the case that i don't want to store RDF data in this new database. Let me explain further:
suppose I create a new database. Then, running mclient and connecting to this database I can run the following query
select * from rdf.graph;
and get as answer the following relation:
+-------+--------+ | gname | gid | +====+===+ +——+------+
This means, that each database a create, regardless the type of data (RDF, structured) that will be stored, it is configured to a predefined database schema, the one that 30_rdf.sql creates: containing a two-columned table with name rdf.graph.
It does not seem logical to me to drop this schema and then create the preferred one to store relational data.
Hope that i made my point clear now.
If you don't want to use, don't --enable-rdf. If you want to use RDF sometimes, just use the rdf schema's graph table whenever you shred something. Why is this predefined table such a problem? I agree it should be created as part of the shredding phase, but alas, it is not. It doesn't harm anything, does it?
No, of course it does not, and of course i can leave with it. If you see my first question, i was wondering from the perspective of the design decision.
Regards, Babis
(PS. I'm on the list, no need to Cc me)
The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb _______________________________________________ MonetDB-users mailing list MonetDB-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/monetdb-users