Rick, I am looking forward to the results of your investigation. I see a need for both external search mechanisms (Lucene, and possible Solr), as well as in-graph search mechanisms based on constrained traversals (eg. Timeline index based on a Btree and the Rtree index used in neo4j-spatial). Any progress in either direction is most welcome.
> From: rick.bullo...@thingworx.com > To: matt...@neotechnology.com; user@lists.neo4j.org > Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 03:57:13 -0700 > Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Timeline index > > Niels/Mattias: we are also exploring a Solr implementation for the index > framework. There are some potential benefits using Solr in a large > graph/HA/distributed scenario that we are investigating. The tough part is > the distributed transactioning, though. > > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "Mattias Persson" <matt...@neotechnology.com> > Date: Mon, May 9, 2011 6:14 am > Subject: [Neo4j] Timeline index > To: "Neo4j user discussions" <user@lists.neo4j.org> > > 2011/4/12 Niels Hoogeveen <pd_aficion...@hotmail.com> > > > > > Hi Mattias, > > Thank you for your response. I am currently working with the version you > > pointed out. My bigger concern is the possible deprecation of this component > > in future releases. > > As I pointed out, there are use cases where the Lucene timeline is not an > > appropriate choice, but the graph-based B-tree Timeline is. For example, > > versioning of nodes in the database requires an index per node (except for > > the version nodes of course), also when using a quad-store with an index on > > recent-entries per context, a timeline index per context is necessary. These > > type of scenarios can potentially create millions of indices, which can > > easily be stored in Neo4J, but are impossible! to store in the Lucene index > > component. > > So my issue is not so much how to use the graph-based B-tree Timeline index > > in version 1.3, but having similar functionality in future releases. > > BTW... love the work you have done on the Lucene component, which is much > > more flexible and usable than previous incarnations. > > Kind regards,Niels Hoogeveen > > > > Allright, I can see the problem with lucene indexes in such a case :) I > think the "legacy index" will live on as it is for at least a while. It may > not be valid with @Deprecated since it's now it's own component, having the > word "legacy" in it. > > Cool, right it opens up the lucene functionality a bit more then the > previous incarnation of the index framework. > > > > > > Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 22:37:42 +0200 > > > From: matt...@neotechnology.com > > > To: user@lists.neo4j.org > > > Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Timeline index > > > > > > Hi Niels, > > > > > > I think you're right about the lucene-based timeline not being right > > > for millions of indices, not possible even! The old index component > > > isn't a part of the official release, but is supported and available > > > as neo4j-legacy-index from neo4j maven repository, > > > http://m2.neo4j.org/org/neo4j/neo4j-legacy-index/ and will have a > > > version synchronized with the org.neo4j:neo4j artifact. Source is > > > here: https://github.com/neo4j/legacy-index > > > > > > 2011/4/12 Niels Hoogeveen <pd_aficion...@hotmail.com>: > > > > > > > > I appreciate the new indexing framework available, and noticed the > > addition of a Timeline based on Lucene. I was wondering if this is seen as a > > replacement of the original graph-based B-tree Timeline. > > > > If that is the case, I will have serious problems with the software I > > am developing, and which uses the B-tree based Timeline in several places > > where Lucene Timeline wouldn't work. > > > > I have many (potentially millions) timeline indexes in my application > > to maintain sort orders. Almost every node in the graph is actually the root > > of one or more Timeline indexes. This works well when the index is graph > > based, but I fear it wouldn't work when using Lucene. I don't think > > maintaining millions of indexes is something Lucene is particularly suited > > for. > > > > I didn't see neo4j-index being part of the 1.3-M5 release, so I'd like > > to check-up to see if this component remains to be supported. > > > > Kind regards,Niels Hoogeveen > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Neo4j mailing list > > > > User@lists.neo4j.org > > > > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Mattias Persson, [matt...@neotechnology.com] > > > Hacker, Neo Technology > > > www.neotechnology.com<http://www.neotechnology.com> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Neo4j mailing list > > > User@lists.neo4j.org > > > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Neo4j mailing list > > User@lists.neo4j.org > > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > > > > > > -- > Mattias Persson, [matt...@neotechnology.com] > Hacker, Neo Technology > www.neotechnology.com<http://www.neotechnology.com> > _______________________________________________ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user > _______________________________________________ > Neo4j mailing list > User@lists.neo4j.org > https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user _______________________________________________ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
