Good day. TinkerPop community. We have started to track our work in the issue tracker https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/YTDB-504/Implement-the-functionality-of-the-match-query. All our issues will be marked by the "gql-implementation" tag. So it will be easy for anybody to find it.
On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 11:28 AM Andrii Lomakin < [email protected]> wrote: > Dear TinkerPop team, > > We have begun implementing GQL. You can follow our progress in the #dev > > GQL implementation > <https://youtrackdb.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/511446-dev/topic/GQL.20.20implementation/with/567717059> > topic. > In our effort to maintain transparency for all developers interested in > the project, no login is required to view this channel. Though you need to > register to participate in discussions. > You are welcome to provide any suggestions or observations there. > > Best regards, > Andrii Lomakin > > On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 8:58 AM Andrii Lomakin < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Cole, >> >> Thank you for your response and for sharing your concerns. I completely >> understood those points when I initially wrote to you, which is why we >> remain committed to collaborating with the TinkerPop team to finalize the >> match() step specification. >> >> Our reasoning is that any specification should be grounded in solid >> implementation and testing. By prioritizing the implementation, we can >> uncover potential pitfalls that may not be apparent from a purely >> usability-oriented perspective. >> >> Additionally, I would like to note that the query specification cannot be >> finalized without the context of the transaction processing lifecycle. >> Discussions in that area have stalled, and I would appreciate it if we >> could move forward at a faster pace. We have significant practical >> experience in this area and are eager to contribute. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Andrii Lomakin >> >> On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 11:37 PM Cole Greer <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Andrii, >>> >>> Thanks for providing your update. I understand your decision, although I >>> regret that the community may not be as involved in the development >>> process. My main concern is that if you and your team complete all of the >>> GQL work independently, that the final product might not be as aligned with >>> the whole TinkerPop community, which may complicate the process of >>> officially incorporating the changes into Gremlin. >>> >>> I understand your need to develop this feature at your own pace and >>> without added constraints. I would like to ask if you and your team can >>> continue to keep us informed as you proceed. I'd be happy to keep providing >>> early feedback on any decisions and progress made by your team, in hopes >>> that we can maintain alignment during development. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Cole >>> >>> On 2026/01/09 08:10:06 Andrii Lomakin via dev wrote: >>> > Dear TinkerPop team, >>> > >>> > I would like to provide an update on our next steps regarding the >>> > integration of GQL with TinkerPop. >>> > >>> > We have hired a new developer, Sandra Adamiec, who will focus on >>> > implementing GQL in YTDB (in CC). After several internal discussions, >>> we >>> > have concluded that our initial approach—creating a detailed >>> specification >>> > before tailoring the implementation—carries significant DevX and >>> > performance risks. >>> > >>> > Instead, we have decided on the following path: >>> > >>> > 1. Create the GQL implementation and its Gremlin integration within >>> our own >>> > distribution. >>> > 2. Once functional, collaborate with the TinkerPop team to finalize a >>> > match() step specification that works for both parties. >>> > 3. Port the implementation (or relevant parts of it) to the official >>> > TinkerPop distribution. >>> > >>> > This strategy allows us to decouple our product timeline from the >>> TinkerPop >>> > release schedule. Additionally, it helps mitigate the performance and >>> > functional risks we identified in the roadmap for the new Gremlin >>> server >>> > implementation. >>> > >>> > We look forward to continuing our discussions regarding the match() >>> step >>> > specification once we have a functional foundation to use for >>> validation. >>> > >>> > Best regards, >>> > Andrii Lomakin >>> > YouTrackDB development lead >>> > >>> >> >> >> -- >> Andrii Lomakin >> YouTrackDB development lead >> > > > -- > Andrii Lomakin > YouTrackDB development lead > -- Andrii Lomakin YouTrackDB development lead
