Benjamin,
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 2:23 AM, Benjamin Gehrels
neo4j-mailingl...@gehrels.info wrote:
great, will merge it in as soon as you send in the CLA, see
http://wiki.neo4j.org/content/About_Contributor_License_Agreement
pull request and CLA are crawling through the sea cables to
Ben,
that is faulty behavior, since the Batchinseter should insert the same data
as in normal operations. Could you provide a test and maybe fix it (fork on
GIThub)? Would be awesome! Otherwise, raise an issue in
https://github.com/neo4j/community so we can get to it ASAP!
Cheers,
/peter
Hi Peter,
Could you provide a test and maybe fix it (fork on
GIThub)? Would be awesome!
No problem, I'll send you a pull request tonight.
I still have one question that already had come to my mind while testing
my own app: Have you ever thought of implementing a GraphDatabaseService
Ben,
great, will merge it in as soon as you send in the CLA, see
http://wiki.neo4j.org/content/About_Contributor_License_Agreement
For testing, we normally use the ImpermanentGraphDatabase which does exactly
this. It's not in RAM, but does the cleanup :)
/peter
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 12:51 AM,
great, will merge it in as soon as you send in the CLA, see
http://wiki.neo4j.org/content/About_Contributor_License_Agreement
pull request and CLA are crawling through the sea cables to sweden right
now.
For testing, we normally use the ImpermanentGraphDatabase which does exactly
this. It's
Hi folks,
i've just - after a lot of searching - recognized, that the
LuceneBatchInserterIndex handles ValueContext[] a little bit different
than the normal one:
When calling add(), the LuceneIndex converts its Parameter to an
Object[], and checks for each element if it is an ValueContext.
6 matches
Mail list logo