DOCSLIB.ORG

Empirical Study on the Usage of Graph Query Languages in Open Source Java Projects

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Empirical Study on the Usage of Graph Query Languages in Open Source Java Projects Philipp Seifer Johannes Härtel Martin Leinberger University of Koblenz-Landau University of Koblenz-Landau University of Koblenz-Landau Software Languages Team Software Languages Team Institute WeST Koblenz, Germany Koblenz, Germany Koblenz, Germany [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Ralf Lämmel Steffen Staab University of Koblenz-Landau University of Koblenz-Landau Software Languages Team Koblenz, Germany Koblenz, Germany University of Southampton [email protected] Southampton, United Kingdom [email protected] Abstract including project and domain specific ones. Common applica- Graph data models are interesting in various domains, in tion domains are management systems and data visualization part because of the intuitiveness and flexibility they offer tools. compared to relational models. Specialized query languages, CCS Concepts • General and reference → Empirical such as Cypher for property graphs or SPARQL for RDF, studies; • Information systems → Query languages; • facilitate their use. In this paper, we present an empirical Software and its engineering → Software libraries and study on the usage of graph-based query languages in open- repositories. source Java projects on GitHub. We investigate the usage of SPARQL, Cypher, Gremlin and GraphQL in terms of popular- Keywords Empirical Study, GitHub, Graphs, Query Lan- ity and their development over time. We select repositories guages, SPARQL, Cypher, Gremlin, GraphQL based on dependencies related to these technologies and ACM Reference Format: employ various popularity and source-code based filters and Philipp Seifer, Johannes Härtel, Martin Leinberger, Ralf Lämmel, ranking features for a targeted selection of projects. For the and Steffen Staab. 2019. Empirical Study on the Usage ofGraph concrete languages SPARQL and Cypher, we analyze the Query Languages in Open Source Java Projects. In Proceedings activity of repositories over time. For SPARQL, we investi- of the 12th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Software gate common application domains, query use and existence Language Engineering (SLE ’19), October 20–22, 2019, Athens, Greece. of ontological data modeling in applications that query for ACM, New York, NY, USA, 15 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3357766. concrete instance data. Our results show, that the usage of 3359541 graph query languages in open-source projects increased over the last years, with SPARQL and Cypher being by far 1 Introduction the most popular. SPARQL projects are more active in terms Graph data models are interesting in various domains, in of query related artifact changes and unique developers in- part due to the flexibility and intuitiveness they offer. Unlike volved, but Cypher is catching up. Relatively few applications the relational data model, schemata may be incrementally use SPARQL to query for concrete instance data: A majority developed and adapted, or even omitted entirely. The graph of those applications employ multiple different ontologies, model is also intuitive for modeling tasks, for example in general knowledge as exemplified by the Wikidata Knowl- Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for edge Graph [70]. Specialized query languages facilitate the personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear use of the graph data model. A long-standing standard is this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components SPARQL [57], a query language for RDF graphs which con- of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with ceptually matches on the triple structure of RDF. For prop- credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to erty graphs, languages like Cypher [27] emerged, featuring redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request specialized constructs to build results by selecting nodes permissions from [email protected]. and edges, either of which may potentially hold properties. SLE ’19, October 20–22, 2019, Athens, Greece © 2019 Association for Computing Machinery. While the major graph-related query approaches have been ACM ISBN 978-1-4503-6981-7/19/10...$15.00 compared in terms of various properties of both language [4] https://doi.org/10.1145/3357766.3359541 and implementation [2, 34], we are interested in the practical SLE ’19, October 20–22, 2019, Athens, Greece Philipp Seifer, Johannes Härtel, Martin Leinberger, Ralf Lämmel, and Steffen Staab usage of such technologies. The focus of this study, therefore, both cases we do not expect representative results in open- is the comparison of overall popularity and practical use of source projects. Our study therefore focuses on the following graph-related query languages in real-world projects. More four graph-related query languages. Examples are given in specifically, we analyze open-source Java projects on GitHub. Figure1, in the context of a simple graph consisting of person Our primary contributions follow. nodes and knows edges. 1. We compare the overall popularity of graph-related query languages in open-source projects, in terms of SELECT ?p ?k WHERE { numbers of projects using the query languages, num- ?p a foaf:Person ; foaf:knows ?k . bers of affected methods and files, numbers of devel- ?k a foaf:Person opers involved and the changes of these numbers over time. } 2. We use a refined, usage criteria-based approach to ana- lyze usage of query languages in open-source projects, MATCH (p: Person) − [ :KNOWS] − >(k:Person) in terms of distinction of framework-like functionality RETURN p , k versus concrete query usage and in terms of determin- ing usage of ontologies. The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. Section2 g . V ( ) motivates the selection of query languages we analyze and . h a s L a b e l ( ' person ' ) . as ( ' p ' ) gives a short overview of these technologies. In Section3, . outE ( ' knows ' ) . inV ( ) we introduce our research questions in depth and design . h a s L a b e l ( ' person ' ) . as ( ' k ' ) the methodology of our study, to then present our results . s e l e c t ( ' p ' , ' k ' ) in Section4. We conclude with related work in Section5, before our summary and future work in Section6. person { name 2 Graph Query Languages knows { name } We restrict our study to popular graph-related query lan- } guages. Our selection is primarily based on two factors. First, we consider languages popular enough to occur in Figure 1. Example queries selecting people and the people the GitHub Linguist classification [29]. For all 461 candidate they know in SPARQL (1st), Cypher (2nd), Gremlin (3rd) and 1 languages we manually identify query languages by con- GraphQL (4th). sidering resources such as project websites, GitHub reposi- tories, or otherwise related Wikipedia entries. We classify the following 11 languages as query related: Flux, GraphQL, SPARQL is a W3C standardized query language for RDF HiveQL, JsonIQ, Lasso, PLSQL, SPARQL, SQL, SQLPL, TSQL graphs, which at its core matches the triple structure (subject, and XQuery. Here SPARQL and GraphQL [21, 30] are pri- predicate and object) of RDF data. SPARQL is strongly asso- marily related to graphs and therefore included in our com- ciated with the semantic web and commonly used conjointly parison. As a baseline we also refer to XQuery [59] (an XML with ontologies. database query language) and SQL. We suspect not all interesting query languages to be listed Cypher is a declarative query language for property graphs, in Linguist, especially since not all languages must pro- initially developed for the Neo4j platform. Since 2015, the duce dedicated artifacts. Therefore, we use our identified language is standardized by the openCypher [53] project. languages as seed languages to find related work on graph- Cypher queries rely on matching graph patterns expressed related query languages. Such work (e.g., [4, 34]) frequently with ASCII-Art syntax. refers to both Cypher [27, 52], the property graph query Gremlin is a graph traversal language with a focus on language initially developed for Neo4j [51], and the Gremlin path-like expressions. It is the core graph matching language graph traversal language [25, 60]. We do not include lan- of the Apache Tinkerpop [24] framework. guages exclusive to proprietary graph databases, or more recent developments in research, such as G-CORE [3]. In GraphQL Unlike the other three query languages, the pri- mary focus of GraphQL is not purely database access. Instead, 1 For the 519 languages that occur in this list, we consider all languages GraphQL was developed as a graph-based replacement for classified as type: data (95, e.g., SQL) or type: programming (366, e.g., C), while excluding those with type classifications of markup (45, e.g., HTML) the REST paradigm. In GraphQL, queries consist of JSON-like and prose (13, e.g., Markdown). We include programming languages since templates that are matched on server side schema definitions, some languages such as XQuery are not classified as data languages. usually in the context of web APIs. Empirical Study on the Usage of Graph Query Languages in Open Source Java Projects SLE ’19, October 20–22, 2019, Athens, Greece 3 Methodology Table 1. Number of dependencies per query language, num- Our empirical study targets open-source projects, with a ber of distinct groups (i.e., project names) and average num- ∼ scope restricted to Java projects and the GitHub platform. ber of dependencies per group (where marks estimations). This section defines the two research questions we answer, as well as the design of our study in terms of data extraction Language Dependencies Groups Per Group and analysis. With our first research question we aim at SPARQL 191 72 2.65 understanding popularity and usage of the selected graph- Cypher 80 14 5.71 based query languages.
Recommended publications
  • Graphql Attack

    Graphql Attack

    GRAPHQL ATTACK Date: 01/04/2021 Team: Sun* Cyber Security Research Agenda • What is this? • REST vs GraphQL • Basic Blocks • Query • Mutation • How to test What is the GraphQL? GraphQL is an open-source data query and manipulation language for APIs, and a runtime for fulfilling queries with existing data. GraphQL was developed internally by Facebook in 2012 before being publicly released in 2015. • Powerful & Flexible o Leaves most other decisions to the API designer o GraphQL offers no requirements for the network, authorization, or pagination. Sun * Cyber Security Team 1 REST vs GraphQL Over the past decade, REST has become the standard (yet a fuzzy one) for designing web APIs. It offers some great ideas, such as stateless servers and structured access to resources. However, REST APIs have shown to be too inflexible to keep up with the rapidly changing requirements of the clients that access them. GraphQL was developed to cope with the need for more flexibility and efficiency! It solves many of the shortcomings and inefficiencies that developers experience when interacting with REST APIs. REST GraphQL • Multi endpoint • Only 1 endpoint • Over fetching/Under fetching • Fetch only what you need • Coupling with front-end • API change do not affect front-end • Filter down the data • Strong schema and types • Perform waterfall requests for • Receive exactly what you ask for related data • No aggregating or filtering data • Aggregate the data yourself Sun * Cyber Security Team 2 Basic blocks Schemas and Types Sun * Cyber Security Team 3 Schemas and Types (2) GraphQL Query Sun * Cyber Security Team 4 Queries • Arguments: If the only thing we could do was traverse objects and their fields, GraphQL would already be a very useful language for data fetching.
  • Graphql-Tools Merge Schemas

    Graphql-Tools Merge Schemas

    Graphql-Tools Merge Schemas Marko still misdoings irreproachably while vaulted Maximilian abrades that granddads. Squallier Kaiser curarize some presuminglyanesthetization when and Dieter misfile is hisexecuted. geomagnetist so slothfully! Tempting Weber hornswoggling sparsely or surmisings Pass on operation name when stitching schemas. The tools that it possible to merge schemas as well, we have a tool for your code! It can remember take an somewhat of resolvers. It here are merged, graphql with schema used. Presto only may set session command for setting some presto properties during current session. Presto server implementation of queries and merged together. Love writing a search query and root schema really is invalid because i download from each service account for a node. Both APIs have root fields called repository. That you actually look like this case you might seem off in memory datastore may have you should be using knex. The graphql with vue, but one round robin approach. The name signify the character. It does allow my the enums, then, were single introspection query at not top client level will field all the data plan through microservices via your stitched interface. The tools that do to other will a tool that. If they allow new. Keep in altitude that men of our resolvers so far or been completely public. Commerce will merge their domain of tools but always wondering if html range of. Based upon a merge your whole schema? Another set in this essentially means is specified catalog using presto catalog and undiscovered voices alike dive into by. We use case you how deep this means is querying data.
  • Red Hat Managed Integration 1 Developing a Data Sync App

    Red Hat Managed Integration 1 Developing a Data Sync App

    Red Hat Managed Integration 1 Developing a Data Sync App For Red Hat Managed Integration 1 Last Updated: 2020-01-21 Red Hat Managed Integration 1 Developing a Data Sync App For Red Hat Managed Integration 1 Legal Notice Copyright © 2020 Red Hat, Inc. The text of and illustrations in this document are licensed by Red Hat under a Creative Commons Attribution–Share Alike 3.0 Unported license ("CC-BY-SA"). An explanation of CC-BY-SA is available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ . In accordance with CC-BY-SA, if you distribute this document or an adaptation of it, you must provide the URL for the original version. Red Hat, as the licensor of this document, waives the right to enforce, and agrees not to assert, Section 4d of CC-BY-SA to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law. Red Hat, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, the Shadowman logo, the Red Hat logo, JBoss, OpenShift, Fedora, the Infinity logo, and RHCE are trademarks of Red Hat, Inc., registered in the United States and other countries. Linux ® is the registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the United States and other countries. Java ® is a registered trademark of Oracle and/or its affiliates. XFS ® is a trademark of Silicon Graphics International Corp. or its subsidiaries in the United States and/or other countries. MySQL ® is a registered trademark of MySQL AB in the United States, the European Union and other countries. Node.js ® is an official trademark of Joyent. Red Hat is not formally related to or endorsed by the official Joyent Node.js open source or commercial project.
  • Towards an Integrated Graph Algebra for Graph Pattern Matching with Gremlin

    Towards an Integrated Graph Algebra for Graph Pattern Matching with Gremlin

    Towards an Integrated Graph Algebra for Graph Pattern Matching with Gremlin Harsh Thakkar1, S¨orenAuer1;2, Maria-Esther Vidal2 1 Smart Data Analytics Lab (SDA), University of Bonn, Germany 2 TIB & Leibniz University of Hannover, Germany [email protected], [email protected] Abstract. Graph data management (also called NoSQL) has revealed beneficial characteristics in terms of flexibility and scalability by differ- ently balancing between query expressivity and schema flexibility. This peculiar advantage has resulted into an unforeseen race of developing new task-specific graph systems, query languages and data models, such as property graphs, key-value, wide column, resource description framework (RDF), etc. Present-day graph query languages are focused towards flex- ible graph pattern matching (aka sub-graph matching), whereas graph computing frameworks aim towards providing fast parallel (distributed) execution of instructions. The consequence of this rapid growth in the variety of graph-based data management systems has resulted in a lack of standardization. Gremlin, a graph traversal language, and machine provide a common platform for supporting any graph computing sys- tem (such as an OLTP graph database or OLAP graph processors). In this extended report, we present a formalization of graph pattern match- ing for Gremlin queries. We also study, discuss and consolidate various existing graph algebra operators into an integrated graph algebra. Keywords: Graph Pattern Matching, Graph Traversal, Gremlin, Graph Alge- bra 1 Introduction Upon observing the evolution of information technology, we can observe a trend arXiv:1908.06265v2 [cs.DB] 7 Sep 2019 from data models and knowledge representation techniques being tightly bound to the capabilities of the underlying hardware towards more intuitive and natural methods resembling human-style information processing.
  • Licensing Information User Manual

    Licensing Information User Manual

    Oracle® Database Express Edition Licensing Information User Manual 18c E89902-02 February 2020 Oracle Database Express Edition Licensing Information User Manual, 18c E89902-02 Copyright © 2005, 2020, Oracle and/or its affiliates. This software and related documentation are provided under a license agreement containing restrictions on use and disclosure and are protected by intellectual property laws. Except as expressly permitted in your license agreement or allowed by law, you may not use, copy, reproduce, translate, broadcast, modify, license, transmit, distribute, exhibit, perform, publish, or display any part, in any form, or by any means. Reverse engineering, disassembly, or decompilation of this software, unless required by law for interoperability, is prohibited. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice and is not warranted to be error-free. If you find any errors, please report them to us in writing. If this is software or related documentation that is delivered to the U.S. Government or anyone licensing it on behalf of the U.S. Government, then the following notice is applicable: U.S. GOVERNMENT END USERS: Oracle programs (including any operating system, integrated software, any programs embedded, installed or activated on delivered hardware, and modifications of such programs) and Oracle computer documentation or other Oracle data delivered to or accessed by U.S. Government end users are "commercial computer software" or “commercial computer software documentation” pursuant to the applicable Federal
  • Large Scale Querying and Processing for Property Graphs Phd Symposium∗

    Large Scale Querying and Processing for Property Graphs Phd Symposium∗

    Large Scale Querying and Processing for Property Graphs PhD Symposium∗ Mohamed Ragab Data Systems Group, University of Tartu Tartu, Estonia [email protected] ABSTRACT Recently, large scale graph data management, querying and pro- cessing have experienced a renaissance in several timely applica- tion domains (e.g., social networks, bibliographical networks and knowledge graphs). However, these applications still introduce new challenges with large-scale graph processing. Therefore, recently, we have witnessed a remarkable growth in the preva- lence of work on graph processing in both academia and industry. Querying and processing large graphs is an interesting and chal- lenging task. Recently, several centralized/distributed large-scale graph processing frameworks have been developed. However, they mainly focus on batch graph analytics. On the other hand, the state-of-the-art graph databases can’t sustain for distributed Figure 1: A simple example of a Property Graph efficient querying for large graphs with complex queries. Inpar- ticular, online large scale graph querying engines are still limited. In this paper, we present a research plan shipped with the state- graph data following the core principles of relational database systems [10]. Popular Graph databases include Neo4j1, Titan2, of-the-art techniques for large-scale property graph querying and 3 4 processing. We present our goals and initial results for querying ArangoDB and HyperGraphDB among many others. and processing large property graphs based on the emerging and In general, graphs can be represented in different data mod- promising Apache Spark framework, a defacto standard platform els [1]. In practice, the two most commonly-used graph data models are: Edge-Directed/Labelled graph (e.g.
  • A Comparison Between Cypher and Conjunctive Queries

    A Comparison Between Cypher and Conjunctive Queries

    A comparison between Cypher and conjunctive queries Jaime Castro and Adri´anSoto Pontificia Universidad Cat´olicade Chile, Santiago, Chile 1 Introduction Graph databases are one of the most popular type of NoSQL databases [2]. Those databases are specially useful to store data with many relations among the entities, like social networks, provenance datasets or any kind of linked data. One way to store graphs is property graphs, which is a type of graph where nodes and edges can have attributes [1]. A popular graph database system is Neo4j [4]. Neo4j is used in production by many companies, like Cisco, Walmart and Ebay [4]. The data model is like a property graph but with small differences. Its query language is Cypher. The expressive power is not known because currently Cypher does not have a for- mal definition. Although there is not a standard for querying graph databases, this paper proposes a comparison between Cypher, because of the popularity of Neo4j, and conjunctive queries which are arguably the most popular language used for pattern matching. 1.1 Preliminaries Graph Databases. Graphs can be used to store data. The nodes represent objects in a domain of interest and edges represent relationships between these objects. We assume familiarity with property graphs [1]. Neo4j graphs are stored as property graphs, but the nodes can have zero or more labels, and edges have exactly one type (and not a label). Now we present the model we work with. A Neo4j graph G is a tuple (V; E; ρ, Λ, τ; Σ) where: 1. V is a finite set of nodes, and E is a finite set of edges such that V \ E = ;.
  • IBM Filenet Content Manager Technology Preview: Content Services Graphql API Developer Guide

    IBM Filenet Content Manager Technology Preview: Content Services Graphql API Developer Guide

    IBM FileNet Content Manager Technology Preview: Content Services GraphQL API Developer Guide © Copyright International Business Machines Corporation 2019 Copyright Before you use this information and the product it supports, read the information in "Notices" on page 45. © Copyright International Business Machines Corporation 2019. US Government Users Restricted Rights - Use, duplication or disclosure restricted by GSA ADP Schedule Contract with IBM Corp. © Copyright International Business Machines Corporation 2019 Contents Copyright .................................................................................................................................. 2 Abstract .................................................................................................................................... 5 Background information ............................................................................................................ 6 What is the Content Services GraphQL API? ....................................................................................... 6 How do I access the Content Services GraphQL API? .......................................................................... 6 Developer references ................................................................................................................ 7 Supported platforms ............................................................................................................................ 7 Interfaces and output types ......................................................................................................
  • Introduction to Graph Database with Cypher & Neo4j

    Introduction to Graph Database with Cypher & Neo4j

    Introduction to Graph Database with Cypher & Neo4j Zeyuan Hu April. 19th 2021 Austin, TX History • Lots of logical data models have been proposed in the history of DBMS • Hierarchical (IMS), Network (CODASYL), Relational, etc • What Goes Around Comes Around • Graph database uses data models that are “spiritual successors” of Network data model that is popular in 1970’s. • CODASYL = Committee on Data Systems Languages Supplier (sno, sname, scity) Supply (qty, price) Part (pno, pname, psize, pcolor) supplies supplied_by Edge-labelled Graph • We assign labels to edges that indicate the different types of relationships between nodes • Nodes = {Steve Carell, The Office, B.J. Novak} • Edges = {(Steve Carell, acts_in, The Office), (B.J. Novak, produces, The Office), (B.J. Novak, acts_in, The Office)} • Basis of Resource Description Framework (RDF) aka. “Triplestore” The Property Graph Model • Extends Edge-labelled Graph with labels • Both edges and nodes can be labelled with a set of property-value pairs attributes directly to each edge or node. • The Office crew graph • Node �" has node label Person with attributes: <name, Steve Carell>, <gender, male> • Edge �" has edge label acts_in with attributes: <role, Michael G. Scott>, <ref, WiKipedia> Property Graph v.s. Edge-labelled Graph • Having node labels as part of the model can offer a more direct abstraction that is easier for users to query and understand • Steve Carell and B.J. Novak can be labelled as Person • Suitable for scenarios where various new types of meta-information may regularly
  • Handling Scalable Approximate Queries Over Nosql Graph Databases: Cypherf and the Fuzzy4s Framework

    Handling Scalable Approximate Queries Over Nosql Graph Databases: Cypherf and the Fuzzy4s Framework

    Castelltort, A. , & Martin, T. (2017). Handling scalable approximate queries over NoSQL graph databases: Cypherf and the Fuzzy4S framework. Fuzzy Sets and Systems. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fss.2017.08.002 Peer reviewed version License (if available): CC BY-NC-ND Link to published version (if available): 10.1016/j.fss.2017.08.002 Link to publication record in Explore Bristol Research PDF-document This is the author accepted manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via Elsevier at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165011417303093?via%3Dihub . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher. University of Bristol - Explore Bristol Research General rights This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/pure/about/ebr-terms *Manuscript 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Handling Scalable Approximate Queries over NoSQL 10 Graph Databases: Cypherf and the Fuzzy4S Framework 11 12 13 Arnaud Castelltort1, Trevor Martin2 14 1 LIRMM, CNRS-University of Montpellier, France 15 2Department of Engineering Mathematics, University of Bristol, UK 16 17 18 19 20 21 Abstract 22 23 NoSQL databases are currently often considered for Big Data solutions as they 24 25 offer efficient solutions for volume and velocity issues and can manage some of 26 complex data (e.g., documents, graphs). Fuzzy approaches are yet often not 27 28 efficient on such frameworks. Thus this article introduces a novel approach to 29 30 define and run approximate queries over NoSQL graph databases using Scala 31 by proposing the Fuzzy4S framework and the Cypherf fuzzy declarative query 32 33 language.
  • The Query Translation Landscape: a Survey

    The Query Translation Landscape: a Survey

    The Query Translation Landscape: a Survey Mohamed Nadjib Mami1, Damien Graux2,1, Harsh Thakkar3, Simon Scerri1, Sren Auer4,5, and Jens Lehmann1,3 1Enterprise Information Systems, Fraunhofer IAIS, St. Augustin & Dresden, Germany 2ADAPT Centre, Trinity College of Dublin, Ireland 3Smart Data Analytics group, University of Bonn, Germany 4TIB Leibniz Information Centre for Science and Technology, Germany 5L3S Research Center, Leibniz University of Hannover, Germany October 2019 Abstract Whereas the availability of data has seen a manyfold increase in past years, its value can be only shown if the data variety is effectively tackled —one of the prominent Big Data challenges. The lack of data interoperability limits the potential of its collective use for novel applications. Achieving interoperability through the full transformation and integration of diverse data structures remains an ideal that is hard, if not impossible, to achieve. Instead, methods that can simultaneously interpret different types of data available in different data structures and formats have been explored. On the other hand, many query languages have been designed to enable users to interact with the data, from relational, to object-oriented, to hierarchical, to the multitude emerging NoSQL languages. Therefore, the interoperability issue could be solved not by enforcing physical data transformation, but by looking at techniques that are able to query heterogeneous sources using one uniform language. Both industry and research communities have been keen to develop such techniques, which require the translation of a chosen ’universal’ query language to the various data model specific query languages that make the underlying data accessible. In this article, we survey more than forty query translation methods and tools for popular query languages, and classify them according to eight criteria.
  • Graphql at Enterprise Scale a Principled Approach to Consolidating a Data Graph

    Graphql at Enterprise Scale a Principled Approach to Consolidating a Data Graph

    A Principled Approach to Consolidating a Data Graph GraphQL at Enterprise Scale A Principled Approach to Consolidating a Data Graph Jeff Hampton Michael Watson Mandi Wise GraphQL at Enterprise Scale Copyright © 2020 Apollo Graph, Inc. Published by Apollo Graph, Inc. https://www.apollographql.com/ All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form on by an electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without permission in writing from the publisher. You may copy and use this document for your internal, reference purposes. You may modify this document for your internal, reference purposes This document is provided “as-is”. Information and views expressed in this document may change without notice. While the advice and information in this document is believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication, the publisher and the authors assume no legal responsibility for errors or omissions, or for damages resulting from the use of the information contained herein. Revision History for the First Edition 2020-09-11: First Release 2020-10-27: Second Release 2020-12-10: Third Release 2021-04-26: Fourth Release Contents The Team v Preface vi Who Should Read this Guide . vi What You’ll Learn from this Guide . vii How to Contact Us . vii Moving Toward GraphQL Consolidation 1 Why Consolidate Your Data Graph? . 1 What Does a Consolidated Data Graph Look Like? . 8 When to Consolidate Your Data Graph . 9 Summary . 14 Graph Champions in the Enterprise 15 The Graph Champion and Graph Administration . 15 Delivering Organizational Excellence as a Graph Champion .