Yes, that explains it.
In ArangoDB 3.x all graph functionality was moved to traversals and the
GRAPH_xx functions were removed.
The general UDF behavior did not change in 3.x compared to 2.8, but it
seems that the custom visitor functions in the 2.8 GRAPH_xx functions
applied some sort of extra filtering for results.
So adding an extra filter as you did is the right way to solve the problem.
By the way, I am not sure if there is a need to use `CALL()`. Maybe there
is, but if the call parameters and UDF function name are fixed, then you
could also invoke the UDF directly, e.g._
FOR v, e, p IN OUTBOUND ...
RETURN my::udf(v, e, p)
instead of
FOR v, e, p IN OUTBOUND ...
RETURN CALL('my::udf', v, e, p)
Best regards
Jan
Am Dienstag, 14. März 2017 08:37:35 UTC+1 schrieb Georgios Kafataridis:
>
> I failed to mention that in arango 2.8 the said UDFs were custom visitor
> functions and the were used along with GRAPH functions.
> In arango 3 I had to use them as regular UDFs executed with CALL().
>
> Could that be the reason ?
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"ArangoDB" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
