Mailing-List: contact jena-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: jena-dev@incubator.apache.org
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 01:01:37 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Stephen Allen (Commented) (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: jena-dev@incubator.apache.org
Message-ID: 
 <94514068.17764.1323997297087.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: 
 <1884146696.8055.1323818010349.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org>
Subject: [jira] [Commented] (JENA-178) SPARQL Results serialization is slow
 for some formats with large result sets
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-178?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13170646#comment-13170646 ] 

Stephen Allen commented on JENA-178:
------------------------------------

Additional note, make sure to modify the test class to use a BufferedOutputStream, or performance will be terrible if you write to disk, especially on the StAX version.
                
> SPARQL Results serialization is slow for some formats with large result sets
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: JENA-178
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-178
>             Project: Jena
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: ARQ
>    Affects Versions: ARQ 2.8.9
>         Environment: Windows 7 Enterprise 64 bit
>            Reporter: Rob Vesse
>         Attachments: Jena178.java, TestArqSerializerPerformance.java, XMLOutputSAX.java, XMLOutputStAX.java
>
>
> The SPARQL XML and JSON Result formats are very slow when the result set is large.  This is surprising to me since both formats are relatively simple and should lend themselves to fairly fast streaming serialization and parsing.
> The following are observed performance figures comparing SPARQL XML, SPARQL JSON and SPARQL TSV results format.  This is the averaged time over 5 runs to retrieve the first 50,000 triples from the dataset with a simple SELECT * WHERE { ?s ?p ?o } LIMIT 50000 via a HTTP request to Fuseki and iterate over the results on the client.
> SPARQL XML = 15.25 seconds
> SPARQL JSON = 10.9 seconds
> SPARQL TSV = 0.54 seconds
> Now obviously TSV is way simpler to serialize and parse than XML/JSON but these serializers and parsers should not be 20-30 times slower IMO
> Also for comparison note that doing an equivalent CONSTRUCT { ?s ?p ?p } WHERE { ?s ?p ?o } LIMIT 50000 takes only about 2s and that is using RDF/XML serialization which I would have expected to be slower because RDF/XML is more complex to generate than either SPARQL XML/JSON results.  I haven't dived into the code in detail to investigate why this is slow yet but do the Jena team have any thoughts on this?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira