Hey, that totally makes sense. No worries about disappointing. =) What's the default sorting based on, then? Is it unspecified? I think it would be helpful to at least know, to help is in design.
Cheers, Aseem On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 7:06 PM, Jim Webber <j...@neotechnology.com> wrote: > Hi Aseem, > > The paged traversers in the REST API don't support sorting, and probably > never will do. Here's why: > > In order to sort, we need a set of results to sort. If we're going to have > a completely sorted result set, we need a complete set of results which may > be large. > > The irony is, even as paged traversals try to keep resource use low by > holding in memory only the state needed to generate the current page, sorted > paged results require massive resource consumption. It's even worse than > non-paged results because now we have to have that state hanging around on > the server until you've finished with it (previously at least we could dump > it down the wire to the client and forget about it). > > So in order to influence the ordering of your paged (or non-paged) results, > you write the traverser logic to favour certain sub-graphs. > > Does that make sense? Sorry to disappoint. > > Jim > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
