[09:01:56] Hi. Is there any particular channel to ask question about SPARQL query? (a query I wrote is timing out, and I would like to undertand what I did wrong) [09:03:33] skylve: this channel can be used for that :) [09:06:34] Amazing! Here are my 2 SPARQL queries. 'http://tinyurl.com/ybkqztv8' works just fine (and is answering in 105ms). On the other hand, 'http://tinyurl.com/yd5r24tv' timeout even though I would assume it process the same amount of information. [09:07:36] Lucas_WMDE: ^ [09:07:49] subqueries seem to work in weird ways, that's all I know :/ [09:09:00] nikki: you think the subqueries would get executed after the main query is? I tried to nest the second part in a subquery too, didn't help. [09:09:48] I don't know, sometimes subqueries make things faster, other times they don't, and I don't understand why [09:24:59] skylve: the optimizer does weird things to subqueries… *named* subqueries are better for “always executed before the main query” [09:25:20] like this: http://tinyurl.com/y7qjpjkr [09:37:04] Lucas_WMDE: do you know when the syntax clarification stuff will be visible? [09:37:24] for the format constraint, you mean? [09:37:28] yeah [09:37:30] two weeks, perhaps [09:37:34] bah [09:37:40] :/ [09:37:44] Lucas_WDME: Amazing! Didn't know you could include some previously computed results in a scope. [09:38:04] skylve: I should point out it’s a nonstandard feature (BlazeGraph extension, not standard SPARQL) [09:38:10] I was trying out multiple format constraints (to catch particular common problems) and wanted to see how it looked [09:38:33] Lucas_WMDE: Nice, good to know. Thanks for the information. [09:38:44] nikki: I guess I can at least deploy it on the test wiki if you want to try it out [09:38:52] I’ll try to do that this evening [09:38:54] nah, it's ok, I'll just wait [09:40:49] the idea was more that I could look at real data and check that it looks good, test wiki doesn't work so well for that [09:41:54] ok