I have to say that I am dubious.
How often does *exactly* the same query get run within 2 minutes ?
Does the same query ever get run ?
The first thing to do, surely, is to create a hash for each query, (or better, perhaps, something like a tinyurl so then the lookup is reversible, record a timestamp for that hash each time the query is run, and then see even over a period of a month how many (if any) queries are being re-run, and if so how often.
I can imagine it's possible that particular tracking queries might be re-run (but probably (a) not every two minutes; and (b) not wanting the same result as last time).
Also perhaps queries with a published link might get re-run -- eg if somebody posts the link for a query-generated graph on twitter that gets a lot of re-tweets. (Or even just if Lydia posts it in the news of the week).
For queries like that, caching might well make sense (and save the server a potential slashdotting).
I'd guess there's probably only a very few queries like that though.
Possibly it's only worth caching a set of results if the same query has *already* been requested within the last n minutes ?
-- James
On 16/02/2016 22:47, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
With Wikidata Query Service usage raising and more use cases being found, it is time to consider caching infrastructure for results, since queries are expensive. One of the questions I would like to solicit feedback on is the following:
Should we have default SPARQL endpoint cached or uncached? If cached, which default cache duration would be good for most users? The cache, of course, applies to the results of the same (identical) query only. Please also note the following is not an implementation plan, but rather an opinion poll, whatever we end up deciding we will have an announcement with actual plan before we do it.
Also, whichever default we choose, there should be a possibility to get both cached and uncached results. The question is when you access the endpoint with no options, which one would it be. So possible variants are:
- query.wikidata.org/sparql is uncached, to get cached result you use
something like query.wikidata.org/sparql?cached=120 to get result no older than 120 seconds ago. PRO: least surprise for default users. CON: relies on goodwill of tool writers, if somebody doesn't know about cache option and uses the same query heavily, we would have to ask them to use the parameter.
- query.wikidata.org/sparql is cached for short duration (e.g. 1
minute) by default, if you'd like fresh result, you do something like query.wikidata.org/sparql?cached=0. If you're fine with older result, you can use query.wikidata.org/sparql?cached=3600 and get cached result if it's still in cache but by default you never get result older than 1 minute. This of course assuming Varnish magic can do this, if not, the scheme has to be amended. PRO: performance improvement while keeping default results reasonably fresh CON: it is not obvious that result is not the freshest data but can be stale, so if you update something in wikidata and query again within minute, you can be surprised
- query.wikidata.org/sparql is cached for long duration (e.g. hours) by
default, if you'd like fresher result you do something like query.wikidata.org/sparql?cache=120 to get result no older than 2 minutes, or cache=0 if you want uncached one. PRO: best performance improvement for most queries, works well with queries that display data that rarely changes, such as lists, etc. CON: for people not knowing about cache option, in may be rather confusing to not be able to get up-to-date results.
So we'd like to hear - especially from current SPARQL endpoint users - what do you think about these and which would work for you?
Also, for the users of the WDQS GUI - provided we have cached and uncached options, which one the GUI should return by default? Should it be always uncached? Performance there is not a major question - the traffic to the GUI is pretty low - but rather convenience. Of course, if you run cached query from GUI and the data in cache, you can get results much faster for some queries. OTOH, it may be important in many cases to be able to access actual content up-to-date, not the cached version.
I also created a poll: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/V8 so please feel free to vote for your favorite option.
OK, this letter is long enough already so I'll stop here and wait to hear what everybody's thinking.
Thanks in advance,