rom: rick.bullo...@thingworx.com
> To: user@lists.neo4j.org
> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 06:02:05 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
>
> We manage that today using Neo. Node "types" are represented by an array
> property on the node - therefore a node c
ent and easy-to-maintain patterns for the
stuff that 95% of applications need, and API-based approaches for the other 5%.
-Original Message-
From: user-boun...@lists.neo4j.org [mailto:user-boun...@lists.neo4j.org] On
Behalf Of Niels Hoogeveen
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 8:50 AM
To: us
hris.gio...@neotechnology.com; user@lists.neo4j.org
> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 05:15:08 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
>
> Chris, I think that auto indexing is another great reason for a formal
> concept of "node type". It could provide an unambiguous l
8:15 AM, Rick Bullotta
wrote:
> Chris, I think that auto indexing is another great reason for a formal
> concept of "node type". It could provide an unambiguous link between a node
> and its indexing strategy(ies).
>
>
>
> - Reply message -
> From: "
I was merely suggesting incremental steps towards nirvana. ;-)
- Reply message -
From: "Peter Neubauer"
Date: Mon, Jul 18, 2011 8:19 am
Subject: [Neo4j] Auto-index fulltext?
To: "Neo4j user discussions"
But then,
how about conditionals and more complex stuf
I think that auto indexing is another great reason for a formal
> concept of "node type". It could provide an unambiguous link between a node
> and its indexing strategy(ies).
>
>
>
> - Reply message -
> From: "Chris Gioran"
> Date: Mon, Jul
Chris, I think that auto indexing is another great reason for a formal concept
of "node type". It could provide an unambiguous link between a node and its
indexing strategy(ies).
- Reply message -
From: "Chris Gioran"
Date: Mon, Jul 18, 2011 6:16 am
Subject
Got it, thanks. =)
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 7:04 AM, Chris Gioran <
chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Aseem Kishore
> wrote:
> > Okay, we look forward to the multiple auto-indexes feature then!
> >
> >> There will still be one auto index for
> >> each primi
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Aseem Kishore wrote:
> Okay, we look forward to the multiple auto-indexes feature then!
>
>> There will still be one auto index for
>> each primitive category.
>
> Can you explain what a "primitive category" is then
I apologize for the confusion. Primitives (or pr
Okay, we look forward to the multiple auto-indexes feature then!
> There will still be one auto index for
> each primitive category.
Can you explain what a "primitive category" is then
Aseem
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 6:15 AM, Chris Gioran <
chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote:
> No, that is no
No, that is not what i meant. The main idea is to provide the means to
configure at least some aspects of the auto index instead of relying
on the default settings only. There will still be one auto index for
each primitive category.
However, one feature under consideration is to actually allow an
Awesome to hear, Chris, thanks. Just to clarify/confirm then: in the future,
we will be able to have *both* an exact auto-index and a fulltext auto-index
side-by-side?
Cheers,
Aseem
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Chris Gioran <
chris.gio...@neotechnology.com> wrote:
> Hi Aseem,
>
> On Sat, Jul
Hi Aseem,
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Aseem Kishore wrote:
> Is the 1.4 auto-index only "exact"? Or can it be configured to be a
> "fulltext" index?
Yes, currently the auto-indexes are only exact, there is no
straightforward way to configure them explicitly. This is a known
shortcoming and
Is the 1.4 auto-index only "exact"? Or can it be configured to be a
"fulltext" index?
(Btw, it would be awesome if we could have two auto-indexes: one exact, one
full-text. It would be great in general if all indexing could be auto. Not
sure when you would ever want/need manual indexing.)
Aseem
_
14 matches
Mail list logo
