Please report back ;) Von meinem iPhone gesendet
> Am 24.06.2015 um 09:27 schrieb Per Kraulis <[email protected]>: > > Thanks! Good suggestion about the :Recent label. That might be the best > solution, will try it. > > Cheers, > Per K > >> On Wednesday, June 24, 2015 at 12:25:29 AM UTC+2, Michael Hunger wrote: >> Per, currently we don't utilize the index for ordering yet as the source of >> the stream of nodes is opaque to the rest of cypher. >> >> So your :RECENT relationship or perhaps a :Recent label would rather make >> sense. >> >> Cheers, Michael >> >>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Per Kraulis <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Does the cypher ORDER BY construct use the label-based index on a property, >>> if such an index exists? >>> >>> I am considering how to best keep track of the latest node modifications, >>> and the alternatives are >>> Timestamp property in node, and using ORDER BY and LIMIT in cypher. >>> Using explicit relationships of type :RECENT from a meta-node >>> 'Modifications' to the relevant nodes, and updating this with each new >>> modification. >>> If cypher ORDER BY uses indexes, then alt 1 is probably less programming >>> hassle? >>> -- >>> 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. -- 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.
