[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP3-612?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14492288#comment-14492288
]
stephen mallette commented on TINKERPOP3-612:
---------------------------------------------
am i allowed to change my vote? :) from a test/enforcement perspective, given
the [~pietermartin] comment i'm starting to think TinkerPop should tend more
towards the specific in this case than the generic otherwise there could be
inconsistency in terms of implementation. i'm sorta feeling +0 at this point.
> Support only two types of Cardinality -- SINGLE and MULTI
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TINKERPOP3-612
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP3-612
> Project: TinkerPop 3
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: structure
> Reporter: Marko A. Rodriguez
> Assignee: Marko A. Rodriguez
> Fix For: 3.0.0.GA
>
>
> We currently support the following {{Cardinality}} states:
> * {{single}}: one property per property key.
> * {{list}}: any number of properties per property key.
> * {{set}}: multi properties for the property key if and only if the values
> are unique.
> Right now equality for {{set}} is determined by {{Object.equals}}. This may
> be sufficient for most users, but maybe not. Next, this is an expensive
> operation for vendors that don't index on value. Finally, it seems to be of
> limited use in practice due to its complex behavior regarding meta-property
> overwriting. I think its best to NOT include {{set}} as an option --
> simplifies the API and is more aligned with the core semantics of:
> * {{single}}
> * {{multi}}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
