Hi,
A fast tip.
The traversal:
> g.v(0).outE[[label:'HOSTS']].inV[[Key:'MyCompanyName']].inE[[label:'IS_COMPANY']].inV
can be written as:
g.v(0).out('HOSTS')[[Key:'MyCompanyName']].in('IS_COMPANY')
The latter is more succinct and should be a bit faster to evaluate.
** The steps out and in were added to Gremlin 0.9+.
Just a heads up,
Marko.
http://markorodriguez.com
On Jun 19, 2011, at 11:55 PM, Romiko Derbynew wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
>
>
> We currently thinking of how we can get type safety when we do queries, one
> thing we do is have a category nodes, so e.g.
>
> Here is a sample query
>
>
>
> IEnumerable<User> list =
> g.v(0).outE[[label:'HOSTS']].inV[[Key:'MyCompanyName']].inE[[label:'IS_COMPANY']].inV
>
>
>
> So the part highlighted in bold leverages the category.
>
>
>
> However, we could also remove the category node (Agencies) and then just have
> more explicit relationships e.g.
>
> IEnumerable<User> list =
> g.v(0).outE[[label:'HOSTS_AGENCY']].inV[[Key:'MyCompanyName']].
>
>
>
>
>
> Notice, here we now have a relationship where from the name we can see that
> the types coming back will always be an Agency. This means relationship names
> have information about it's target Node type, making the amount of
> relationships proportional to the number of node types.
>
>
>
> What are the advantages/disadvantages of both approaches, which achieve the
> same result?
>
>
>
> Regards
> _______________________________________________
> Neo4j mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
_______________________________________________
Neo4j mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
