Oh, confused this thread with store layer changes for type/direction of relationships. This fruit in this thread is pretty low hanging.
Den lördagen den 6:e augusti 2011 skrev Mattias Persson<matt...@neotechnology.com>: > I would not consider this low hanging fruit btw > > Den onsdagen den 3:e augusti 2011 skrev Niels > Hoogeveen<pd_aficion...@hotmail.com>: >> >> Hmmm... Does that require the inclusion of golden parachutes as well? >> Anyway, <addressing the readers of this message that have time allocation >> authority>. I hope my suggestion, or another technical solution that solves >> the same issues will be picked up for 1.5. This is as far as I can tell >> pretty much low hanging fruit. There are probably all sorts of tweaks that >> can improve the performance of Neo4j, but this one can improve the >> performance of Neo4j big time (under certain conditions). As a user who is >> confronted with several very densely connected nodes, I have tried all sorts >> of means to solve my issues, but none as rewarding as a solution in core >> would be. >> Niels >>> Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 16:31:04 +0200 >>> From: matt...@neotechnology.com >>> To: user@lists.neo4j.org >>> Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Node#getRelationshipTypes >>> >>> A golden helicopter might do the trick :) >>> >>> 2011/8/3 Niels Hoogeveen <pd_aficion...@hotmail.com> >>> >>> > >>> > How does one persuade the time allocation authorities? >>> > Niels >>> > >>> > > Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 09:28:45 +0200 >>> > > From: matt...@neotechnology.com >>> > > To: user@lists.neo4j.org >>> > > Subject: Re: [Neo4j] Node#getRelationshipTypes >>> > > >>> > > Yup, it's a pretty sane approach and somewhat along the lines of how I >>> > feel >>> > > it would be done. It's been said a long time that "this functionality >>> > will >>> > > be implemented some day" and it's just that a significant amount of time >>> > > have to be invested... maybe not for implementing it, but for >>> > > discovering >>> > > all bugs and inconveniences to have it on par with production quality. >>> > And >>> > > that kind of time haven't been allocated yet. >>> > > >>> > > I appreciate your thoughts and time on all this! >>> > > >>> > > Best, >>> > > Mattias >>> > > >>> > > 2011/8/3 Niels Hoogeveen <pd_aficion...@hotmail.com> >>> > > >>> > > > >>> > > > I would like to make a suggestion that would both address my feature >>> > > > request and increase performance of the database. >>> > > > >>> > > > Right now the NodeRecord >>> > (org.neo4j.kernel.impl.nioneo.store.NodeRecord) >>> > > > contains the ID of the first Relationship, while the >>> > > > RelationshipRecord >>> > > > contain the ID's of the previous and next relationship for both sides >>> > of the >>> > > > relationship. >>> > > > >>> > > > My suggestion is as follows: >>> > > > >>> > > > Create a new store: >>> > > > >>> > > > noderelationshiptypestore.db >>> > > > >>> > > > The layout of this store is given by the NodeRelationshipTypeRecord: >>> > > > >>> > > > id >>> > > > previousrelationshiptype >>> > > > nextrelationshiptype >>> > > > firstrelationship >>> > > > >>> > > > The NodeRecord would now need to point to the first outgoing >>> > > > NodeRelationshipType and to the first incoming NodeRelationshipType >>> > instead >>> > > > of to the first Relationship. >>> > > > >>> > > > On insert of a Relationship, one side of the relationship will update >>> > the >>> > > > store from the outgoing side, the other side will update the store for >>> > the >>> > > > incoming side. >>> > > > >>> > > > I will list the steps to take here for the outgoing side (the incoming >>> > side >>> > > > is almost identical). >>> > > > >>> > > > From the NodeReco-- > Mattias Persson, [matt...@neotechnology.com] > Hacker, Neo Technology > www.neotechnology.com > -- Mattias Persson, [matt...@neotechnology.com] Hacker, Neo Technology www.neotechnology.com _______________________________________________ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
