Wikidata SPARQL aficionados,
This SPARQL query worked for several weeks, but quit working a few days ago:
PREFIX rdfs: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema# PREFIX wikibase: http://wikiba.se/ontology# PREFIX entity: http://www.wikidata.org/entity/ PREFIX p: http://www.wikidata.org/prop/direct/
SELECT ?propUrl ?propLabel ?valUrl ?valLabel WHERE { hint:Query hint:optimizer 'None' . entity:Q42 ?propUrl ?valUrl . ?valUrl rdfs:label ?valLabel
FILTER (LANG(?valLabel) = 'en') .
?property ?ref ?propUrl . ?property a wikibase:Property . ?property rdfs:label ?propLabel
FILTER (lang(?propLabel) = 'en' ) } ORDER BY ?propUrl ?valUrl LIMIT 100
Here is the first part of the exception:
java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException: java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException: org.openrdf.query.QueryEvaluationException: java.lang.RuntimeException: java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException: java.lang.RuntimeException: java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException: java.lang.Exception: task=ChunkTask{query=7be8b715-1429-4348-bf97-237d06d6084c,bopId=17,partitionId=-1,sinkId=19,altSinkId=null}, cause=java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException: java.lang.RuntimeException: com.bigdata.rdf.internal.NotMaterializedException: Vocab(6)
Any ideas on how I can modify the query to work again?
Please advise, James Weaver
Stas,
I've narrowed it down to the ORDER BY clause. Changing from:
ORDER BY ?propUrl ?valUrl
to:
ORDER BY ?propLabel ?valLabel
allowed me to patch the app with a temporary workaround.
Thanks, James Weaver
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016, at 04:27 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
Wikidata SPARQL aficionados,
This SPARQL query worked for several weeks, but quit working a few days ago:
No idea what happened, I'll look into it.
-- Stas Malyshev smalyshev@wikimedia.org
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
Hi!
Stas,
I've narrowed it down to the ORDER BY clause. Changing from:
ORDER BY ?propUrl ?valUrl
to:
ORDER BY ?propLabel ?valLabel
Seems to be caused by recent fix for T113374, which did not work as expected. I have rolled back the deployment for now and will investigate why it broke later.
Thanks for the report!