Thomas Mueller wrote:
I'm not concerned about an implementation not being able to 'support'
setLimit(). I rather think of applications using that new method and at the same
time wish to find out the total number of matches, as written initially by
Christoph.
I understand.
keep the setLimit() as is. but introduce a getSize() (or getTotalMatches()?) on
the QueryResult. This method always returns the total number of nodes/rows
independent of setLimit().
That's a good idea! Implementations that can't support it efficiently
could then calculate the size only when required. What about
getTotalSize()?
Implementations should maybe even allowed to return -1 (as on
RangeIterator.getSize()) if they do not support this method ...
Cheers,
Christoph
