Perfect. Thanks, Jim. Nice to meet you in person last week. Look forward
to chatting w/you and Michael on some ideas for the REST API.
-Original Message-
From: user-boun...@lists.neo4j.org [mailto:user-boun...@lists.neo4j.org] On
Behalf Of Jim Webber
Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2011 6:26 PM
Hi Rick,
> That prompts two more questions: Any chance of backporting this to Neo4J
> 1.2? If not, any rough estimate of the 1.3 release timetable?
Full releases are every quarter, M05 is due next week, and the following
release will be 1.3 GA. So you're looking at about 3 weeks.
Jim
Thanks, Mattias.
That prompts two more questions: Any chance of backporting this to Neo4J
1.2? If not, any rough estimate of the 1.3 release timetable?
Rick
-Original Message-
From: user-boun...@lists.neo4j.org [mailto:user-boun...@lists.neo4j.org] On
Behalf Of Mattias Persson
Sent: Th
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Peter Neubauer
wrote:
> Thanks Massimo,
> Will check it out tomorrow!
You're welcome, it's easy and funny to play with neo4j.
Please know that every test has been conducted with neo4j 1.3.M04
untuned, that every rounds involve the creation of nodes and
relations
Thanks Massimo,
Will check it out tomorrow!
/peter
Send from my mobile device, please excuse typos and brevity.
On Mar 13, 2011 4:49 PM, "Massimo Lusetti" wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Massimo Lusetti
wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Peter Neubauer
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Let
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Massimo Lusetti wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Peter Neubauer
> wrote:
>
>> Let me know how it goes!
>
> Here are the results: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22802242/neo4j-stats.ods
>
> As you can see JDBM is slower then Lucene in my tests and the growing
>
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Peter Neubauer
wrote:
> Let me know how it goes!
Here are the results: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22802242/neo4j-stats.ods
As you can see JDBM is slower then Lucene in my tests and the growing
trend in ms is steeper.
Every rounds parse 20 rows of my data, the
Batistuta,
It is for using Neo4j-Server, but is based on the current-API (1.3.x) not on
the 1.0 version that jo4neo runs against.
You can update jo4neo to use the latest neo4j api locally (or fork the
project). Then you can use 1. the current neo4j graph database, 2. the current
neo4j-rest-wra
Let me know how it goes!
/peter
Send from my mobile device, please excuse typos and brevity.
On Mar 13, 2011 9:18 AM, "Massimo Lusetti" wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Ashwin Jayaprakash
> wrote:
>
>> Try JDBM2 - http://code.google.com/p/jdbm2/issues/detail?id=1
>>
>> It's been resurre
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Ashwin Jayaprakash
wrote:
> Try JDBM2 - http://code.google.com/p/jdbm2/issues/detail?id=1
>
> It's been resurrected by another author.
Seems pretty interesting in the context... Going to give it a whirl
Thanks!
--
Massimo
http://meridio.blogspot.com
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Tobias Ivarsson
wrote:
> I need at least these two files:
> neostore.nodestore.db
> neostore.relationshipstore.db
I managed to get permission to send you data and tomorrow while in
office I'll let you know the URL.
Thanks so much for the great support!
--
Mass
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Mattias Persson
wrote:
> And I'm curious about why the neo4j lucene layer adds overhead and how your
> code looks like in your own solution.
I really don't know, didn't had time to investigate in neo4j code but
I'm indexing a SHA1 hash key pointing to a Node jus
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Peter Neubauer
wrote:
> No,
> things are not failing, it is just that in big insertion scenarios the
> index lookup when joining nodes together into relationships, there is
> often just an exact index needed in order to do that. We have good
> experiences with Lu
13 matches
Mail list logo
