databases.
Or we just have different views of what kind of fruit to consider low
hanging.
Niels
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2011 22:16:15 +0200
From: matt...@neotechnology.com
To: user@lists.neo4j.org
Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Node#getRelationshipTypes
Oh, confused this thread with store layer changes
@lists.neo4j.org
Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Node#getRelationshipTypes
2011/8/6 Niels Hoogeveen pd_aficion...@hotmail.com
This is the thread about store layer changes for type/direction, and in my
opinion this is still quite low hanging fruit. Sure, the impact needs to be
tested rigorously, which
To: user@lists.neo4j.org
Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Node#getRelationshipTypes
A golden helicopter might do the trick :)
2011/8/3 Niels Hoogeveen pd_aficion...@hotmail.com
How does one persuade the time allocation authorities?
Niels
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 09:28:45 +0200
From: matt
very densely connected nodes, I have tried all sorts
of means to solve my issues, but none as rewarding as a solution in core
would be.
Niels
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 16:31:04 +0200
From: matt...@neotechnology.com
To: user@lists.neo4j.org
Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Node#getRelationshipTypes
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2011 22:16:15 +0200
From: matt...@neotechnology.com
To: user@lists.neo4j.org
Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Node#getRelationshipTypes
Oh, confused this thread with store layer changes for type/direction
of relationships. This fruit in this thread is pretty low hanging.
Den lördagen
From: pd_aficion...@hotmail.com
To: user@lists.neo4j.org
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 23:03:41 +0200
Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Node#getRelationshipTypes
Building an API on top of Neo4j of course pushes the standard API to
its
limits. So for that matter it is already a good
of means to solve my issues,
but none as rewarding as a solution in core would be.
Niels
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 16:31:04 +0200
From: matt...@neotechnology.com
To: user@lists.neo4j.org
Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Node#getRelationshipTypes
A golden helicopter might do the trick :)
2011/8/3 Niels Hoogeveen
in their associated classes
and is not spread around the implementation.
Niels
From: michael.hun...@neotechnology.com
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2011 23:20:50 +0200
To: user@lists.neo4j.org
Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Node#getRelationshipTypes
Imho it would have to iterate as well.
As the type
.
Niels
From: pd_aficion...@hotmail.com
To: user@lists.neo4j.org
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 23:03:41 +0200
Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Node#getRelationshipTypes
Building an API on top of Neo4j of course pushes the standard API to its
limits. So for that matter it is already a good exercise.
Any
17:29:29 +0100
To: user@lists.neo4j.org
Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Node#getRelationshipTypes
Hi Niels,
Ignoring the operational use for getting relationship types, I do think these
should be generalised from:
RelationshipType[] getRelationshipTypes();
RelationshipType[] getRelationshipTypes
the set of RelationshipTypes, but
this is not a proper solution when nodes are densely connected. So there is
no general solution for this question yet.
Niels
From: j...@neotechnology.com
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2011 17:29:29 +0100
To: user@lists.neo4j.org
Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Node
Jul 2011 23:20:50 +0200
To: user@lists.neo4j.org
Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Node#getRelationshipTypes
Imho it would have to iterate as well.
As the type is stored with the relationship record and so can only be
accessed after having read it.
It might be to have some minimal performance
While working on Enhanced API, I realize two crucial method are missing on the
Node interface of the standard API:
RelationshipType[] getRelationshipTypes();
RelationshipType[] getRelationshipTypes(Direction);
For Enhanced API, I'd like to be able to plug in different Relationship
13 matches
Mail list logo
