1

I noticed that GraphDB, in contrast to RDF4J, does not allow dots in repository IDs. We have versioned repositories containing some taxonomies. The version number is used in repository ID, so for example: taxonomy-0.1.3.

While this works fine in RDF4J, I have to call such a repository differently in GraphDB, e.g. taxonomy-0_1_3. I'd like to be able to use the same set of queries with federation (SERVICE calls referencing the taxonomy repositories) on both RDF4J and GraphDB, so that I could switch between the two based on the use case. In RDF4J, I could work around version numbers by having a federated store with version-less ID pointing to a specific versioned repository. But, as far as I know, GraphDB does not support federated repositories.

Does anyone have an idea how to overcome such a problem? Or are there any plans for supporting less restrictive repository IDs in GraphDB?

Thanks a lot

kidney
  • 2,663
  • 17
  • 23
  • 1
    I'm not sure why the naming rules are different, but: why not just use the naming convention that you know works on both platforms? If you use use `taxonomy-0_1_3` as a naming scheme for both RDF4J and GraphDB you can freely transport your queries. – Jeen Broekstra Mar 26 '20 at 03:14
  • Thanks Jeen. It's a bit more complicated. The taxonomy repositories in RDF4J are preexisting and I was hoping to avoid having to migrate them... But I think this will be the only solution. – kidney Mar 26 '20 at 06:45
  • You can rename rdf4j repositories without having to migrate them, if you can take them temporarily offline, that is. – Jeen Broekstra Mar 26 '20 at 10:49
  • 1
    Yeah, that's what I was hoping to avoid:) Thanks again, Jeen. I'll wait if anyone from Ontotext provides any feedback and probably close the question if not... – kidney Mar 26 '20 at 12:03

1 Answers1

0

GraphDB supports SPARQL Federation (or do you mean something else by "federated repositories"?)

I'll post your request as an enhancement task (GDB-5023), but without business context it'll have low priority...

Vladimir Alexiev
  • 2,477
  • 1
  • 20
  • 31
  • I meant something like RDF4J [federated store](https://rdf4j.org/documentation/programming/federation/). Thanks. – kidney Sep 16 '20 at 16:22