That was my mistake, thanks.
Some websites have mentioned Lucene as the indexing service for Neo4j, and
as far as I know, Lucene has this issue that it can return null however the
data existed in database.
But this schema indexing seems to be the one I was looking for :)
On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 3:30:51 PM UTC-8, Michael Hunger wrote:
>
> Actually your first query was not valid cypher, correct is:
>
> Match (u:User {userid:1})-[f:Friends{status:2}]-(uu:User) RETURN COUNT
> (uu)
>
> Also I would love to know how you came thinking that the indexes are
> not exact lookups?
>
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 10:43 PM, Reihane Boghrati
> <[email protected]<javascript:>>
> wrote:
> > Thanks, I really appreciate your help.
> >
> > Reihane
> >
> > On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 1:42:04 PM UTC-8, Chris Vest wrote:
> >>
> >> I think the query planner internally rewrites queries of the first
> form,
> >> to queries of the second form, so they should have pretty much
> identical
> >> performance.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Chris Vest
> >> System Engineer, Neo Technology
> >> [ skype: mr.chrisvest, twitter: chvest ]
> >>
> >>
> >> On 12 Feb 2014, at 22:35, Reihane Boghrati <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Thank you so much, I'll try that and I'll let you know :)
> >> I have one more question, what is the difference between these two
> >> queries? Is the first one faster?
> >>
> >> Match (u:User {userid=1})-[f:Friends{status=2}]-(uu:User) RETURN COUNT
> >> (uu)
> >> Match (u:User) -[f:Friends]- (uu:User) WHERE u.userid=1 AND f.status =2
> >> RETURN COUNT (uu);
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Reihane
> >>
> >> On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 12:13:20 PM UTC-8, Chris Vest wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> The schema indexes are 100% accurate. If they are not, then that's a
> bug
> >>> I'd be happy to know about.
> >>>
> >>> Indexes should not influence correctness. They should only be about
> >>> performance.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Chris Vest
> >>> System Engineer, Neo Technology
> >>> [ skype: mr.chrisvest, twitter: chvest ]
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 12 Feb 2014, at 19:54, Reihane Boghrati <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I'm writing a client for Neo4j to evaluate that with BG benchmark.
> >>> As far as I know, Neo4j is using Lucene for indexing nodes and the
> Cypher
> >>> query for creating index is something like : CREATE INDEX ON
> :Users(userid)
> >>> I believe that Lucene retrieval is not 100% accurate, meaning that if
> it
> >>> doesn't return data, one cannot be sure data is not existed. Is that
> right?
> >>> I browsed different websites but I couldn't find an alternative index
> >>> service. I was wondering if anyone is aware of any other accurate
> index
> >>> provider that can be used in Neo4j?
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>> Reihane
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> 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.
> >>
> >>
> > --
> > 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] <javascript:>.
> > 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.
