looks like i need to drop the index first?

just to be clear, if a constraint is added, does this imply an index?
so, i dont need to worry about adding an index after i add a constraint?

On Sunday, December 22, 2013 8:39:49 PM UTC-6, Javad Karabi wrote:
>
> Michael, i already have the id field indexed, does this not guarantee 
> uniqueness?
>
> I ask because the result of
> CREATE CONSTRAINT ON (m:Member) ASSERT m.id IS UNIQUE
> is
> Already indexed :Member(id).
>
>
> On Sunday, December 22, 2013 7:45:37 PM UTC-6, Michael Hunger wrote:
>>
>> try to create a unique constraint on a label and your "id" field.
>>
>> That will take an lock then to assure unique creation.
>>
>> Michael
>>
>> Am 23.12.2013 um 02:00 schrieb Javad Karabi <[email protected]>:
>>
>> if i have 2 cypher query posts to neo4j
>>
>> "MERGE a:Member( {id: {member_id} })" , member_id: 5
>>
>> "MERGE a:Member( {id: {member_id} })" , member_id: 5
>>
>> with both of these posts occurring simultaneously, is it possible to have 
>> 2 nodes created, instead of just the one?
>> that is, if the first merge was interrupted halfway though, and had not 
>> completed yet, the second then creates a new one since it doesnt see the 
>> first...
>> is this something that could potentially happen?
>>
>> on a related note, how would i enforce uniqueness on Member(id) ?
>>
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Neo4j" 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/groups/opt_out.
>>
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Neo4j" 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/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to