We very much worked with them, even repoduced their dataset and setup and pointed out the incorrect use and configuration of Neo4j as well as a shortcoming of their data-model.
They happily accepted the information but didn't bother to update their *original* article. After our last post <http://istc-bigdata.org/index.php/benchmarking-graph-databases/> about benchmarking graph databases, Neo Technology <http://www.neotechnology.com/> representatives contacted us and said that they repeated the shortest path queries on Neo4j <http://www.neotechnology.com/neo4j-graph-database/> with the Facebook dataset and they observed 2-4 orders of magnitude better performance. This was an intriguing comment and we were very interested in finding out why this could be the case. On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Ton Akveld <[email protected]> wrote: > Could be wrong, but I read the article end "We highly appreciate the > feedback from Neo Technology representatives!" as a wish, not a comment on. > :-) > > > On Monday, November 3, 2014 6:58:18 PM UTC+1, Mark Findlater wrote: >> >> Yes, I believe istc-bigdata really appreciated it. >> >> Article begins - "Neo Technology representatives contacted us and said..." >> >> Article ends - "We highly appreciate the feedback from Neo Technology >> representatives!" >> >> I think there is still a wait for Kamilos to share further information.. >> >> M >> >> On Monday, 3 November 2014 17:50:55 UTC, Ton Akveld wrote: >>> >>> Interesting to know if Neo Technology gave feedback as requested: *We >>> highly appreciate the feedback from Neo Technology representatives!* >>> From: http://istc-bigdata.org/index.php/benchmarking-graph- >>> databases-updates/ >>> >>> On Monday, November 3, 2014 4:43:31 PM UTC+1, Ton Akveld wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi group, >>>> >>>> I just saw this question, and neo4j alleged performance worries me too. >>>> Especially when remarks like this: <Neo4j's main bottleneck is the >>>> memory it consumes. An OSM file up to one >>>> gigabyte seems to be the limit for Neo4j; importing larger datasets >>>> takes a long time and queries become >>>> slow.> >>>> What worries me even more is the absence of reactions of Neo4j's TLM. >>>> How to convince the world of positive use of Neo4j's graph database >>>> when these 'rumors' are not disproved? >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> >>>> Ton >>>> >>>> >>>> On Friday, October 31, 2014 9:10:10 PM UTC+1, gg4u wrote: >>>>> >>>>> hi, >>>>> also interested in this. >>>>> i d love to benchmark similar queries against NoSql (dynamo on aws) >>>>> could you please share a foo table publicly? >>>>> my model on nosql is >>>>> node A as index, all neighbors of A as value (a whole string). >>>> >>>> -- > 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/d/optout. > -- 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/d/optout.
