Cool! The challenge is to provide an API that works regardless of the underlying index implementation used - or of course the different indexes could add their own REST endpoints that ARE specific, and we provide explicit plugins for e.g. Lucene or Redis ...
Cheers, /peter neubauer GTalk: neubauer.peter Skype peter.neubauer Phone +46 704 106975 LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer http://www.neo4j.org - Your high performance graph database. http://startupbootcamp.org/ - Öresund - Innovation happens HERE. http://www.thoughtmade.com - Scandinavia's coolest Bring-a-Thing party. On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Aseem Kishore <aseem.kish...@gmail.com>wrote: > Okay! Will think about this and get back to you soon. > > Peter, I gotta say -- your open-mindedness and willingness to help > developers like me is awesome and much appreciated. Customer satisfaction, > etc. =) > > Cheers, > Aseem > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Peter Neubauer < > peter.neuba...@neotechnology.com> wrote: > > > Aseem, > > If you can provide a nice suggestion on how exactly it would look, maybe > I > > can implement it if the others agree? > > > > /peter > > > > Sent from my phone. > > On Aug 25, 2011 7:19 PM, "Aseem Kishore" <aseem.kish...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Thanks Peter, we'll look into Gremlin. =) > > > > > > But I'll push back a bit and say it would still ask for a feature like > > this > > > to be a first-class feature of the REST API. If my app is e.g. in > Python, > > > it's not super API-friendly for me to have to write Java-ish code to > > achieve > > > what I want. > > > > > > I'd get it if what I was asking for was an uncommon edge case request. > > But > > > for quite a while, this has been the one biggest pain point of Neo4j > for > > us: > > > how to return a meaningful subset of traverse results instead of all > > > results. Having a paged traverser doesn't help at all if you can > neither > > > specify the order nor know what the default ordering is based on (I > asked > > a > > > while back and was told it's unspecified). (And again, by "order" here > I > > > mean beyond just "breadth first".) > > > > > > I'm all for simple, minimalistic and elegant APIs. I'm also all for > being > > > scenario-driven, and solving problems rather than building arbitrary > > > features. So perhaps one solution here would be to introduce a new > > built-in > > > "best first" order that's just like Djikstra's shortest-path API: you > > just > > > specify a "cost" property (or function) for nodes and/or relationships. > > This > > > would definitely solve our problem, and, I suspect, most people's > > problems > > > in this regard. It wouldn't be a bulky feature that doesn't fit in (it > > would > > > compliment Djikstra's very nicely), and it wouldn't require writing a > > > complex Gremlin script to achieve this (I would think) common > > requirement. > > > > > > I'll get off the soapbox now. ;) Thanks for your consideration! > > > > > > Aseem > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Peter Neubauer < > > > peter.neuba...@neotechnology.com> wrote: > > > > > >> See the other mail for a pointer :) > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> > > >> /peter neubauer > > >> > > >> GTalk: neubauer.peter > > >> Skype peter.neubauer > > >> Phone +46 704 106975 > > >> LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer > > >> Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer > > >> > > >> http://www.neo4j.org - Your high performance graph database. > > >> http://startupbootcamp.org/ - Öresund - Innovation happens HERE. > > >> http://www.thoughtmade.com - Scandinavia's coolest Bring-a-Thing > party. > > >> > > >> > > >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:00 AM, Matt Luongo <m...@scholr.ly> wrote: > > >> > > >> > +1, we could really use that. Client-side sorting sucks. > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > Matt Luongo > > >> > Co-Founder, Scholr.ly > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Aseem Kishore < > > aseem.kish...@gmail.com > > >> > >wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > I've just spent a bunch of time reading into how one can control > the > > >> > > ordering of a traverse beyond simple "breadth first" or "depth > > first". > > >> > More > > >> > > precisely, even when breadth first, how one can control *which* > > >> neighbors > > >> > > are traversed first. > > >> > > > > >> > > (It matters less in which order they're traversed vs. which order > > >> they're > > >> > > returned if you're returning all results, since you can just sort > on > > >> the > > >> > > client. But it matters a lot if you want to use the paged > traverser, > > >> > since > > >> > > you're then only returning the first results.) > > >> > > > > >> > > I've learned that this is doable from Java by writing your own > > >> > > BranchSelector implementation: > > >> > > > > >> > > http://components.neo4j.org/neo4j/1.4.1/apidocs/ > > >> > > > > >> > > I've found the built-in implementations, e.g. the pre-order > > >> breadth-first > > >> > > and depth-first: > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > https://github.com/neo4j/community/blob/master/kernel/src/main/java/org/neo4j/kernel/PreorderBreadthFirstSelector.java > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > https://github.com/neo4j/community/blob/master/kernel/src/main/java/org/neo4j/kernel/PreorderDepthFirstSelector.java > > >> > > > > >> > > To achieve a custom "best first", Igor Dovgiy for example shared > > that > > >> he > > >> > > modeled his implementation of the breadth-first selector, except > > just > > >> > using > > >> > > a PriorityQueue instead of a regular Queue. > > >> > > > > >> > > My question is: is there any way to specify this sort of thing > over > > the > > >> > > REST > > >> > > API instead of having to write a plugin? If not, does that sound > > like > > a > > >> > > reasonable feature request? > > >> > > > > >> > > I really just want something simple: nodes ordered by some > > "timestamp" > > >> > > property. It's killing us that we can't do this today. We might > just > > >> have > > >> > > to > > >> > > look into writing this as a plugin... > > >> > > > > >> > > Thanks! > > >> > > > > >> > > Aseem > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > >> > > 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 > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > _______________________________________________ Neo4j mailing list User@lists.neo4j.org https://lists.neo4j.org/mailman/listinfo/user
