Was working on serializing JanusGraph predicates - geo, text - for withRemote. Since those predicates become P, I had to borrow and modify the TinkerPop P serializer and noticed that something's not like the other.
Robert Dale On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> wrote: > Robert, how did you go about hitting that problem with P.inside()? It > occurs to me now that this was so deadly a bug because I'm not sure we ever > end up actually serializing an "inside". > > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 6:23 AM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > We do have a test for P.inside in the process tests but I didn't realize > > that it doesn't compile to a P.inside at bytecode serialization time: > > > > gremlin> g.V(1).outE().has("weight", P.inside(0.0d, > 0.6d)).inV().explain() > > ==>Traversal Explanation > > ============================================================ > > ============================================================ > > =========================== > > Original Traversal [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > > > ConnectiveStrategy [D] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > MatchPredicateStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > FilterRankingStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > InlineFilterStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > IncidentToAdjacentStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > AdjacentToIncidentStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > RepeatUnrollStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > RangeByIsCountStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > PathRetractionStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > LazyBarrierStrategy [O] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > TinkerGraphCountStrategy [P] [GraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > TinkerGraphStepStrategy [P] [TinkerGraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > ProfileStrategy [F] [TinkerGraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > StandardVerificationStrategy [V] [TinkerGraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > > > Final Traversal [TinkerGraphStep(vertex,[1]), > > VertexStep(OUT,edge), HasStep([weight.and(gt(0.0), lt(0.6))]), > > EdgeVertexStep(IN)] > > > > We likely need more direct serialization tests of P, but I think those > > already exist in master. Made a note to review further after release. > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Robert Dale <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Fix pushed to tp32 and master. > >> > >> Robert Dale > >> > >> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected] > > > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Well - now that the VOTE on 3.2.5 is cancelled we can now fix up these > >> > couple of issues, specifically: > >> > > >> > 1. anyStepRecursively() bug (kuppitz is going to handle that) > >> > 2. Gryo serialization of inside() (robert dale, you had the fix for > >> that - > >> > do you want to just CTR that in? though i'm also interested in why > tests > >> > didn't catch that problem) > >> > > >> > I'm going to leave out the other issue noted: > >> > > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1691 > >> > > >> > as it is not user facing - just something related to the test suite > >> > (providers at least have a workaround for that if they hit problems as > >> they > >> > can @OptOut). > >> > > >> > I also don't intend to deploy another SNAPSHOT so i'm just going to > >> keep us > >> > on "3.2.5" and not revert to "3.2.5-SNAPSHOT". Let's just patch this > up > >> > then I'll start on a fresh release packaging tomorrow. > >> > > >> > Any other concerns? > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 6:27 AM, Robert Dale <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > That will probably work too. I use https://wummel.github.io/linkc > >> hecker/ > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Robert Dale > >> > > > >> > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 6:20 AM, Daniel Kuppitz <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > https://validator.w3.org/checklink > >> > > > > >> > > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Stephen Mallette < > >> > [email protected]> > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > huh - that's a neat idea. is there a specific tool you use? > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 5:48 AM, Robert Dale <[email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Linkchecker passes. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Robert Dale > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 6:38 AM, Stephen Mallette < > >> > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I published latest docs for 3.2.5-SNAPSHOT: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/3.2.5-SNAPSHOT/ > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > and made another deployment to the Apache Snapshot Repo > after > >> > those > >> > > > > > > TinkerFactory adjustments. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Stephen Mallette < > >> > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Just a reminder that code is frozen on the tp32 branch > >> starting > >> > > > > > tomorrow > >> > > > > > > > (Saturday) and for the following week. We'll use this > >> thread to > >> > > > > discuss > >> > > > > > > any > >> > > > > > > > issues or problems on 3.2.5 that are found during testing. > >> > There > >> > > > are > >> > > > > no > >> > > > > > > > open pull requests and no outstanding issues that I'm > aware > >> of. > >> > > > I've > >> > > > > > > > published a TinkerPop 3.2.5-SNAPSHOT for providers to test > >> > > against > >> > > > > (or > >> > > > > > > they > >> > > > > > > > may build themselves - whatever is more convenient). > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks, > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Stephen > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >
