Qualifying the relationships with an additional property (or properties)
sounds like a sensible approach.
The simplest thing to do would be to have a boolean property to distinguish
the two types, so they would both have relationship type KNOWS, and also
a boolean property well. You could use
Reminds me of:
http://qconlondon.com/london-2009/presentation/Null+References:+The+Billion+Dollar+Mistake
On 15 November 2011 08:15, Peter Neubauer
peter.neuba...@neotechnology.comwrote:
The void is spreading. Beware.
Cheers,
/peter neubauer
GTalk: neubauer.peter
Skype
Hi Effy,
From how you describe the model you've created, I don't think it's
structured very well to help you perform the kind of queries you're looking
for.
It looks like you have a single tree with products as the root. This
single tree structure means that there is no way to navigate between
Hi Stefan,
On 22 August 2011 15:15, Stefan Matheis matheis.ste...@googlemail.comwrote:
results in 'Unexpected identifier'. what would be possible, just to
increase the readability is the following:
alert( foo\n +
bar );
This is certainly a solution if you are in an environment that
Hello fellow graphistas,
My name is Alistair Jones, and as the newest engineer on the Neo4j team, I
get to introduce myself* and announce our newest release all in one go.
Since we recently released Neo4j 1.4 GA, the devs have been busy working on
improvements to the codebase based on feedback
5 matches
Mail list logo
