Search Mailing List Archives

Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[protege-discussion] duplicate names reg

kala devi ramar kala_ramar at
Wed Jun 19 20:54:29 PDT 2013

Dear all
In the given ontology space is allowed between names and duplicate names are used in classes and properties. please tell me how it s possible?. it is very urgent for me
thank u

--- On Thu, 6/20/13, protege-discussion-request at <protege-discussion-request at> wrote:

From: protege-discussion-request at <protege-discussion-request at>
Subject: protege-discussion Digest, Vol 83, Issue 14
To: protege-discussion at
Date: Thursday, June 20, 2013, 12:34 AM

Send protege-discussion mailing list submissions to
    protege-discussion at

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
    protege-discussion-request at

You can reach the person managing the list at
    protege-discussion-owner at

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of protege-discussion digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. RMI server scalability for Protege Frames 3.5    editor (John Pierre)


Message: 1
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:26:57 -0700
From: John Pierre <johnmapierre at>
To: protege-discussion at
Subject: [protege-discussion] RMI server scalability for Protege
    Frames 3.5    editor
    <CADwK6dw9iyKYj4h=XqJu_fxiDyMuB5ny1vahGxHYqO84xyjUxg at>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

We are trying to set up a collaborative installation so multiple developers
can edit a Frames ontology.  The ontology currently has about 25,000 frames.

We have successfully configured the RMI server and can connect clients to
the server and access the example ontologies across the network.

The problem is that our 25,000 frame ontology isn't able to load into the
clients when accessed across the network.

Our ontology is MySQL backed.

The ontology loads fine when accessed on the same machine without going
through the rmi server.

The ontology loads but takes several minutes to do so when running the
client and server on the same machine through the localhost loopback.

The ontology loading hangs and cannot load when running the client and
server on different machines either on a wide area network (20+Mbps) nor on
a local area Ethernet network (100+Mbps).  After waiting 30 mins or so we
get broken pipes and/or timed out connections.

The ontology loads if the MySQL database is accessed across the network
directly without using the client-server (.pprj file is on the client side
but points to a MySQL database hosted on the network)

Therefore the culprit seems to be network demands of the rmi server.

We have  -Dserver.use.compression=true turned on at the server.

We've tried -Dserver.client.preload.skip=true on the client side.

It seems this 25,000 frame ontology might be too large for the RMI
client-server architecture, but the Protege documentation seems to hint
that much larger ontologies have been developed using Protege.


1. What is the practical scalability limit of the Protege RMI client-server
in terms of ontology size?

2.  Are there additional configuration settings that we can try to get our
ontology to load?

3.  Are there other collaboration models we could try for allowing multiple
people to work on a large scale Frames ontology besides the rmi
client-server approach?

Thanks in advance for your help.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>


protege-discussion mailing list
protege-discussion at

End of protege-discussion Digest, Vol 83, Issue 14
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: weather-ont-t2.owl
Type: text/xml
Size: 121043 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the protege-discussion mailing list