[Pellet-users] Pellet performance on a Jena project

[Michael Smith]

On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 17:30 +0200, Matteo Montalto wrote:

> I did also some other tests and asked on the Jena ML, but all makes me 
> thinking that it's a pellet-related question. Also because, in solution 
> 1), where Pellet is used as owl reasoner without SWRL support, 
> performance are definitely much better.
> 
> Do you have any hint/suggestion to give me?

There are two ways that the rules engine can be used within the ABox
completion code, controlled by PelletOptions.USE_CONTINUOUS_RULES.

The default (false) only uses the rules engine once and creates
disjunctions for all subsequent completion.

The alternative uses the rules engine for each pass through the
completion loop, and should give much better performance.  I suggest
modifying your program to include the following in an initialization
block.

org.mindswap.pellet.PelletOptions.USE_CONTINUOUS_RULES = true;


The default was false because the alternative path was less tested.
That is no longer the case, and the default setting for this option will
change in the next release.
-- 
Mike Smith

Clark & Parsia