[00:51:04] <SothoTalKer>	 anyone still alive? i guess not, typical european centric projects ;p
[09:27:06] <icinga-wm>	 PROBLEM - wikidata.org dispatch lag is higher than 300s on www.wikidata.org is CRITICAL: HTTP CRITICAL: HTTP/1.1 200 OK - pattern not found - 1966 bytes in 0.109 second response time
[09:32:16] <icinga-wm>	 RECOVERY - wikidata.org dispatch lag is higher than 300s on www.wikidata.org is OK: HTTP OK: HTTP/1.1 200 OK - 1949 bytes in 0.083 second response time
[16:12:49] <Floatingpurr>	 Hello guys, I'm wondering the reason why "SELECT ?id ?item WHERE { ?item p:P5114 ?s .?s ps:P5114 ?id }" and "SELECT ?item WHERE { ?item wdt:P5114 ?x. }" get a different result
[16:14:34] <abian>	 Hi, Floatingpurr :)
[16:15:24] <Floatingpurr>	 The second query returns 65438 rows (that is the expected value). The first returns sometimes 61779 row, sometimes 64443...
[16:15:31] <Floatingpurr>	 hello abian
[16:16:07] <nikki>	 the wdt prefix doesn't include deprecated statements and doesn't include normal rank statements either if there are preferred rank ones
[16:16:24] <nikki>	 but that doesn't explain why there are more statements when not using wdt
[16:16:30] <nikki>	 err
[16:16:37] <nikki>	 fewer
[16:16:38] <abian>	 +1 (hi, nikki) :/
[16:16:44] <nikki>	 hi!
[16:17:38] <Floatingpurr>	 it's very strange
[16:25:17] <nikki>	 hmm... http://tinyurl.com/y9976kmq finds 995 statements where the value is missing but the ones I looked at all have values
[16:26:11] <nikki>	 I tried editing one and ran the query again, and then the number went down by one
[16:27:29] <nikki>	 so it seems like something went wrong when the query service was adding the item
[16:27:50] <nikki>	 I've seen it miss updates before, but the id was already there when creating the item, so that's odd
[16:32:24] <Floatingpurr>	 ouch! :(
[16:37:38] <Floatingpurr>	 can I open an issue to fix that problem?
[16:38:45] <Floatingpurr>	 It's also odd that the output of the 1st query sometimes varies. :/
[16:42:48] <abian>	 Is this also happening with SELECT DISTINCT?
[16:50:31] <Floatingpurr>	 do you mean: SELECT distinct ?item WHERE { ?item wdt:P5114 ?x. }?
[16:50:38] <abian>	 Yes
[16:51:24] <abian>	 Not saying that's the problem, but we have to try...
[16:53:13] <abian>	 Ah, no, sorry, I meant the first query, Floatingpurr
[16:56:03] <Floatingpurr>	 abian: a little report
[16:56:55] <Floatingpurr>	 it seems there is no double id: SELECT ?item WHERE {   ?item wdt:P5114 ?x.   ?item2 wdt:P5114 ?x.  FILTER (?item != ?item2) }
[16:57:51] <Floatingpurr>	 but, strangely enough, SELECT distinct ?item WHERE { ?item wdt:P5114 ?x. } => 65437 rows
[16:58:26] <Floatingpurr>	 SELECT ?item WHERE { ?item wdt:P5114 ?x. } ==> 65438 rows
[16:59:40] <Floatingpurr>	 first query with no distinct == >
[17:00:28] <Floatingpurr>	 64268query with distinct ==>
[17:01:10] <Floatingpurr>	 sorry, now it seems the 1st query get 64268 row with AND without distinct
[17:02:16] <SothoTalKer>	 very nice, VIAF mixed two persons :D
[17:02:22] <abian>	 Okay, so the first one doesn't vary now ¬¬
[17:07:33] <Floatingpurr>	 It seems so...
[17:42:51] <Floatingpurr>	 abian: now the queries w/ and w/out distinct get different output once again... What is happening?
[17:47:42] <SothoTalKer>	 a gltich in the matrix
[17:48:06] <abian>	 I find 61780, 64268 or 64444, no matter if I use DISTINCT or not
[17:57:58] <nikki>	 the query service has multiple servers, if you're getting different numbers of results for the same query, then the servers have different data
[22:27:56] <Floatingpurr>	 So, I notified a problem some hours ago but then I disconected and therefore I was not be able to follow the issue. Summarizing, there is a problem with two queries which should be equivalent.
[22:30:21] <Floatingpurr>	 here is the problem: https://pastebin.com/YHEYxXva
[22:30:38] <Floatingpurr>	 it seems still not fixed :,(