[Nepomuk] [Soprano-devel] Benchmarking storage backends

[Sebastian Trüg]

On Friday 23 October 2009 14:36:42 Ben Martin wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 13:22 +0200, Sebastian Trüg wrote:
> > On Thursday 22 October 2009 12:43:55 Ben Martin wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >   As I'm tinkering with a new backend design for soprano I'm wondering
> > > what folks use to benchmark nepomuk for KDE4 usage?
> > >
> > >   Do folks just use the generic RDF benchmarking:
> > > http://esw.w3.org/topic/RdfStoreBenchmarking
> > > when comparing sesame2 to virtuoso backend for example?
> >
> > folks, in this case me, don't do much benchmarking at all. So far there
> > was no real need for it since there has never been any choice: in the
> > beginning we only had redland. You know that it is slow by using it for a
> > few days. No need for a benchmark. Then we had sesame2 which is
> > deprecated by Virtuoso simply because the latter has so many advantages.
> > Performance is not even in the top 5. ;)
> 
> The two main areas that I'm targeting with my memory mapped soprano
> backend are as a quick, read only, in process cache for desktop and for
> embedded or pseudo embedded targets like the maemo.

right, but how does a read-only backend help us in Nepomuk?
 
> I can definitely see the attraction to Virtuoso on the desktop / LAN but
> for mobile devices V might not be available :|

Well, I think that mobile devices in a year or two should not have a problem 
with 50Mb of ram usage.

Cheers,
Sebastian