Using Neo4J 2.1.5.
Data:
- 2000 Persons
- KNOWS relationships between some of them
Goal of the query:
For each person, display her fullname + amount of friends + amount of
friends' friends + amount of friends' friends' friends.
MATCH (person:Person)
WITH person
OPTIONAL MATCH
Yes, but it would never be counted as a friend of friend.
On Wednesday, March 16, 2016 at 12:28:44 AM UTC+1, Michael Hunger wrote:
>
> your shortest-path doesn't imply that it's not the same person.
>
> Robert would also be counted as direct friend.
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 12:25 AM, Michael
Yes, but it would never be counted as a friend of friend.
> Le 16 mars 2016 à 00:28, Michael Hunger a
> écrit :
>
> your shortest-path doesn't imply that it's not the same person.
>
> Robert would also be counted as direct friend.
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016
your shortest-path doesn't imply that it's not the same person.
Robert would also be counted as direct friend.
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 12:25 AM, Michael Azerhad wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> I think your query would result wrong results.
>
> Michael - *KNOWS* - Julia -
shortestPath returns the right results.
Without it, wrong results.
--
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 neo4j+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more
try this:
MATCH (person:Person)
OPTIONAL MATCH (person)-[:KNOWS]-(f1:Person)-[:KNOWS]-(f2:Person)-[:KNOWS]-(
f3:Person)
WITH person, count(distinct f1) as f1, count(distinct f2) as f2,count(distinct
f3) as f3
RETURN person._firstName + " " + person._lastName, f1, f2, f3
alternatively
MATCH
Hi Michael,
I think your query would result wrong results.
Michael - *KNOWS* - Julia - *KNOWS* - Robert - *KNOWS* - Michael (same
Michael as previous one)
It would consider Robert as a friend's friend for Michael (Michael - Julia
- Robert).
However, it is his direct friend ... (Robert -
Hi
I created and index and updated the properties so their are added in the
index :)
Then now I am able to run queries and they are really fast :)
But is this schema based index some kind of btree or lucene text index,
so if I move to this new schema index instead of legacy lucene native,
Thanks for the input.
Without knowing just how expensive my model is in terms of performance I
believe I have some pretty solid reasons for the verbosity. (DNA, in spite
of having only four base pairs is also verbose, so maybe I'm on to
something. :D )
Part of the reason for the existence of