mulgara | An RDF TripleStore in Java | Data Manipulation library

by quoll Java Version: Current License: OSL-3.0

X-Ray Key Features Code Snippets Community Discussions(1)Vulnerabilities Install Support

kandi X-RAY | mulgara Summary

mulgara is a Java library typically used in Retail, Utilities, Data Manipulation applications. mulgara has a Weak Copyleft License and it has low support. However mulgara has 677 bugs, it has 10 vulnerabilities and it build file is not available. You can download it from GitHub.

Mulgara Semantic Store is a directed graph database designed to store metadata in a transaction safe environment.

Support

Quality

Security

License

Reuse

Support

mulgara has a low active ecosystem.

It has 45 star(s) with 8 fork(s). There are 5 watchers for this library.

It had no major release in the last 6 months.

There are 2 open issues and 1 have been closed. There are 1 open pull requests and 0 closed requests.

It has a neutral sentiment in the developer community.

The latest version of mulgara is current.

Quality

mulgara has 677 bugs (45 blocker, 61 critical, 406 major, 165 minor) and 12457 code smells.

Security

mulgara has no vulnerabilities reported, and its dependent libraries have no vulnerabilities reported.

mulgara code analysis shows 10 unresolved vulnerabilities (10 blocker, 0 critical, 0 major, 0 minor).

There are 62 security hotspots that need review.

License

mulgara is licensed under the OSL-3.0 License. This license is Weak Copyleft.

Weak Copyleft licenses have some restrictions, but you can use them in commercial projects.

Reuse

mulgara releases are not available. You will need to build from source code and install.

mulgara has no build file. You will be need to create the build yourself to build the component from source.

Installation instructions are not available. Examples and code snippets are available.

mulgara saves you 187340 person hours of effort in developing the same functionality from scratch.

It has 189140 lines of code, 13791 functions and 1777 files.

It has medium code complexity. Code complexity directly impacts maintainability of the code.

Top functions reviewed by kandi - BETA

kandi has reviewed mulgara and discovered the below as its top functions. This is intended to give you an instant insight into mulgara implemented functionality, and help decide if they suit your requirements.

Invokes a descriptor and returns the result
Reconstructs a full URL from a partial URL
Gets a descriptor from the free pool
Process the transformation
Configures the Mulgara server
Loads the embedded logging configuration
Shutdown the Mailer
Sets up the system properties
Handle a key pressed event
Resolve a constraint
Prepares the transaction
Truncates the mapped file
Deploys all parameters
Test for concurrent read - write test
Dump the current state of the index
Process user request
Handle key pressed event
Test for concurrent subquery query
Resolves the given datatype
Initialize tuples
Gets the parameters
Remove this node from the tree
Generate TagInfo tags
Modify or delete an RDF statement
Get the descriptor
Resolves a constraint

Get all kandi verified functions for this library.

mulgara Key Features

No Key Features are available at this moment for mulgara.

mulgara Examples and Code Snippets

No Code Snippets are available at this moment for mulgara.

Community Discussions

Trending Discussions on mulgara

Are these two SPARQL 1.0 queries equivalent?

QUESTION

Are these two SPARQL 1.0 queries equivalent?

Asked 2020-Jun-19 at 02:41

I'm querying a Mulgara triple store with the following two queries, trying to return subjects that do not match certain values. I'm limited to whatever parts of SPARQL 1.0 that Mulgara implements, and I'm curious if these two queries are effectively the same, or if there are behavioral differences that I'm not see in my results.

Thanks in advance for your time and help.

Query 1:

...

ANSWER

Answered 2020-Jun-18 at 17:16

In general, no, these are not equivalent. Some of of the reasons why include:

The former has an explicit list of model values to include, while the latter attempts to exclude values. Depending on the data, the two queries may return very different results
The latter query uses a REGEX on the string value of ?models, but does not:
- verify that the values of ?models is an IRI (it could be a literal that satisfies the filter conditions, for example)
- verify that the REGEX is matching at the end of the string (I presume this is the intent)

And as a comment already mentions above, the use of REGEX will likely also have significant impact on query performance.

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/62452140

Community Discussions, Code Snippets contain sources that include Stack Exchange Network

Vulnerabilities

No vulnerabilities reported

Install mulgara

You can download it from GitHub.
You can use mulgara like any standard Java library. Please include the the jar files in your classpath. You can also use any IDE and you can run and debug the mulgara component as you would do with any other Java program. Best practice is to use a build tool that supports dependency management such as Maven or Gradle. For Maven installation, please refer maven.apache.org. For Gradle installation, please refer gradle.org .

Support

For any new features, suggestions and bugs create an issue on GitHub. If you have any questions check and ask questions on community page Stack Overflow .

Find more information at: