Graph databases vs. triple stores

梦想的初衷 提交于 2019-11-29 20:58:16

With Virtuoso you have the following working for you:

-- SPARQL, SQL, SPASQL (SPARQL inside SQL), and SQL inside SPARQL support (e.g. for dealing with N-ary relations via magic/function predicates/properties.

-- works as a compact engine (e.g., as exploited via KDE Desktop) or massive DBMS as demonstrated via the live 17 Billion Triples+ LOD Cloud Cache or the smaller DBpedia live instance.

-- includes Full Text indexing and text patterns in SPARQL (via bif:contains) it also included XPath/Xquery (via xcontains)

-- Acid or Non Acid mode ditto Schema-Last when dealing with Property Graph Store

-- Via Transformation Middleware it can pull data from 80+ data sources (includes REST APIs, SOAP services, Hypermedia Resource, ODBC or JDBC accessible relational data sources etc..) and transform into Transient or Persistent Linked Data graphs

-- Linked Data publishing is automatic i.e., post DBMS record creation you have in-built Linked Data Pages that as views into the DBMS. No messing around re. URL-Rewrite rules, 303 redirects or anything like that. InterWeb scale Super Keys just work!

That's it for now :-)

For horizontal scale (thus small to medium sized databases) graph databases like neo4j will currently give better performance for graph traversals. Triplestores are catching up though. The big advantage of a Triple Store compared to a graph database is that data dumps and query language are standardized, which means its a lot easier to move to another product and prevent vendor lock-in.

易学教程内所有资源均来自网络或用户发布的内容,如有违反法律规定的内容欢迎反馈
该文章没有解决你所遇到的问题?点击提问,说说你的问题,让更多的人一起探讨吧!