llama_index SPARQL Notes 09
I lost internet connectivity last night, woke up this morning with no electricity. The electric came on pretty soon - I had been warned ENEL were messing with the village wiring. The net took a trip into town to sort out (billing error, and then they took ages to switch me back on). The money I was expecting hasn't yet arrived t the bank, so still no OpenAI credit. So I spent most of the day staring at the wall/Twitter.
Ok, it seems like I was looking at the wrong place to put the query. Not query()
but :
def get(self, subj: str) -> List[List[str]]:
"""Get triplets."""
...
The implementation in nebulagraph.py
is scary!
Fool Danny, I forgot to put a logger bit in to check what gets returned there.
In simple.py
:
def get(self, subj: str) -> List[List[str]]:
"""Get triplets."""
return self._data.graph_dict.get(subj, [])
Wey mentions 'flattened' around get_rel_map()
, where the subject is given with a list of associated rel, obj. But this looks less flat.
I'll assume for now, if data =
"one", "two", "three"
"one", "two", "four"
"two", "two", "four"
get('one')
will return :
[[`one', 'two', 'three'], ['one','two','four']]
Now I'm confused. I did put a logger into get()
, list of lists, lol. Nothing came out.
Ok, I'll make a helper method that acts as above, see where it go when I can see the behaviour again.
@prefix er: http://purl.org/stuff/er# . @base http://purl.org/stuff/data .
Query like :
PREFIX er: <http://purl.org/stuff/er#>
BASE <http://purl.org/stuff/data>
SELECT DISTINCT ?rel ?obj WHERE {
GRAPH <http://purl.org/stuff/guardians> {
?triplet a er:Triplet ;
er:subject ?subject ;
er:property ?property ;
er:object ?object .
?subject er:value ?subj_string .
?property er:value ?rel .
?object er:value ?obj .
}
}
Ok, that worked via Fuseki's UI. For code, replace ?subj_string
with {subj}
. Put it in def sparql_query(self, query_string):
sparqlwrapper will not doubt need help producing what I want, need to RTFM there, results.response
somewhere - if it's available as a list of lists that'd be nice.
I'm using GET method, I don't like POST unless really necessary (it's floppy in the spec).
I must make an endpoint-focused test for this
Wired in to get()
, that'll do for today.