Disable setting the IRI of predicates in Relationship tables of RDFGraphs or make it behave correctly (hashtag2773)

[vikramsubramanian]

I tried the following query in the UniKG example in the documentation:

MATCH (r:UniKG_r {iri:" 
WHERE p.iri =  " 
SET p.iri = " 
RETURN r.iri, p.iri, o.iri

This query is trying to set the IRI of the resource node. I got the following output:

--------------------------------------------------
| r.iri                          | p.iri | o.val |
--------------------------------------------------
|  |       | 60000 |
--------------------------------------------------

Which already is wrong. But it also did not have any effect, i.e., the IRI stayed the same:

MATCH (r:UniKG_r {iri:" 
WHERE p.iri =  " 
RETURN r.iri, p.iri, o.val;
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| r.iri                          | p.iri                            | o.val |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  |  | 60000 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The previous IRI is still there. And when I query for all triples, I don't see any triple of Waterloo with predicate

We should either disable setting iris of predicates or support this so that we implement the right behavior, which is: 1) add the predicate if needed to Resources table 2) set the IRI of the predicate relationship. )

[mayil-ai[bot]]

Summary: Issue with setting the IRI of predicates in Relationship tables of RDFGraphs in UniKG example.

Possible Solution

Based on the provided information, the issue is with setting the IRI of predicates in Relationship tables of RDFGraphs. The IRI of the resource node is not being set correctly. To address this issue, consider the following solution:

• Ensure that when setting the IRI for a predicate in a Relationship table, the IRI is first added to the Resources table if it does not already exist.
• Modify the bind_graph_pattern.cpp file to include logic that checks if the IRI exists in the Resources table and adds it if necessary before setting it on the Relationship.
• Update the setProperty function to handle the setting of the iri property correctly, ensuring that it references the correct entry in the Resources table.
• If the system has a validation or constraint system, ensure that it allows for the IRI of predicates to be updated correctly.
• If the system uses a transaction system, ensure that the changes are committed to the database after updating the IRI.

Here is a pseudo-code outline of the steps to take in the bind_graph_pattern.cpp file:

if (!resourceTableIDs.empty()) {
    // ... existing code ...

    // Check if the IRI exists in the Resources table
    auto iriID = checkAndAddIRIToResourcesTable(iri);

    // Set the IRI of the predicate relationship
    setProperty(queryRel, rdf::IRI, iriID);

    // ... existing code ...
}

And in the setProperty function:

void setProperty(Entity entity, String propertyKey, String propertyValue) {
    if (propertyKey.equals(rdf::IRI)) {
        // Logic to set the IRI property, referencing the Resources table
    } else {
        // Existing logic for other properties
    }
}

Make sure to test the changes thoroughly to ensure that the IRI is being set correctly and that the expected behavior is achieved.

Code snippets to check

• src/binder/bind/bind_graph_pattern.cpp

  This snippet contains logic for binding properties of relationships in RDF graphs, which is directly related to the issue of setting the IRI of predicates in Relationship tables.