Just to add a little bit about those timings:

The number of hits and the query time are pretty similar for items
within Greater London:
     http://tinyurl.com/z6h7tvn
(4687 items in 562 ms)

compared to items within 10km of Trafalgar Square:
     http://tinyurl.com/j7jyc27
(6616 items in 668 ms)


The total number of statues we have is 11884
     http://tinyurl.com/zuscnnt
(342 ms)

All of these numbers are quite small, suggesting the performance issue
isn't necessarily to do with what gets looked up first, but may be
something else to do with the join.

   -- James.


On 10/05/2016 18:28, James Heald wrote:
> Very nice!
>
> As a slight tweak on your query, here are some statues within 10km of
> London's Trafalgar Square
> http://tinyurl.com/htxqp5t
>
> ... or within 10km of Stockholm's Stortorget
> http://tinyurl.com/jnv5qo3
> (Warning: per a recent decision of the Swedish Supreme Court, the latter
> search may be a copyright violation).
>
> Probably quite a lot of items to add on both counts -- has anybody
> scoured Commons for public art, that may not yet have an article in any
> Wikipedia? -- but really exciting to be able to produce output like this
> so easily.
>
> One thing I'm a little nervous about is that the first search is taking
> six and a half seconds to run, compared to 809 ms for every statue
> within Greater London
>    http://tinyurl.com/hwf7pjg
> which I would have thought ought to be a similar-sized query.
>
> I haven't checked the optimiser output -- is this likely to be because
> the join has been performed in a different order?  Or is there a good
> reason why the geo-search should be so much slower, even now it has
> indexing built in ?
>
> One other thing for the wishlist -- it would be really nice if the map
> mouseovers could show thumbnails (and indeed if there was a toggle to
> allow them for the table output, too).  Also, should the Commons links
> not point to the file information pages, or alternatively to
> MediaViewer, rather than directly to the images?  The latter makes it
> very hard to see the attribution information (etc) for the images, which
> could be a licence violation, eg of CC-BY.
>
> But overall: wow!   Fantastic!
>
> All best,
>
>     James.
>


_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata