[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP3-781?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Matt Frantz updated TINKERPOP3-781:
-----------------------------------
Description:
Currently, if we do an aggregating step (e.g. {{fold}}, {{groupCount}}, etc.)
within the {{local}} step, we lose the path information.
{noformat}
gremlin> g.V(1).local(both().fold()).path()
==>[[v[3], v[2], v[4]]]
{noformat}
It would be better if the preceding portion of the path were still retained
like so:
{noformat}
gremlin> g.V(1).local(both().fold()).path()
==>[v[1], [v[3], v[2], v[4]]]
{noformat}
was:
Currently, if we do an aggregating step (e.g. {{fold}}, {{groupCount}}, etc.)
within the {{local}} step, we lose the path information.
{noformat}
gremlin> g.V(1).as('a').local(both().fold()).as('b').select('a', 'b')
==>[b:[v[3], v[2], v[4]]]
{noformat}
It would be better if the preceding portion of the path (step "a" in the
example) were still retained. Like so:
{noformat}
gremlin> g.V(1).as('a').local(both().fold()).as('b').select('a', 'b')
==>[a:v[1], b:[v[3], v[2], v[4]]]
{noformat}
> Local aggregation should not destroy path
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: TINKERPOP3-781
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP3-781
> Project: TinkerPop 3
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Matt Frantz
>
> Currently, if we do an aggregating step (e.g. {{fold}}, {{groupCount}}, etc.)
> within the {{local}} step, we lose the path information.
> {noformat}
> gremlin> g.V(1).local(both().fold()).path()
> ==>[[v[3], v[2], v[4]]]
> {noformat}
> It would be better if the preceding portion of the path were still retained
> like so:
> {noformat}
> gremlin> g.V(1).local(both().fold()).path()
> ==>[v[1], [v[3], v[2], v[4]]]
> {noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
