More stuff --- One thing I think that we really need to drive home to providers is TraversalStrategies. That should be a blog post too. I've talked to two graph databases providers recently and both were concerned about performance through the TinkerPop API. They didn't know they could write provider-specific strategies to bypass TinkerPop and talk directly to their databases native APIs/optimizations. Once that was clear, both were like "ahhhhhhh…."
Marko. http://markorodriguez.com On May 25, 2016, at 9:18 AM, Ran Magen <rma...@gmail.com> wrote: > Psssht, the original Uni_pop _has Tinkerpop support, and a better unicorn > logo... > > > > Seriously though, for wider Tinkerpop adoption it would be cool to have a > general "Provider Template" along with the tutorial/blogpost : > > * Default `structure` implementation, with /*IMPLEMENT READ/WRITE/ETC HERE*/ > in the relevant places. > > * Default `process` implemantions (i.e. `TraversalStrategy`s). This should > probably be "commented out" at first, and "uncommented" after the basic > structure implementation is working. > * Default setup of test suites. > * Configurations > * pom.xml > * Gremlin Console plugin > * Utility scripts (e.g. deploy&run in console/server) > > On May 25 2016, at 5:36 pm, Jason Plurad <plur...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Agreed. A big on-going problem TinkerPop has is that people invariably > stumble upon TinkerPop 2 and Blueprints/Pipes. If they find TP2, maybe they > presume it is dead, so they roll their own. > >> > >> I've been tinkering recently in this space, more specifically to better > understand the gremlin-test suite in general. A blog post sounds like a > good idea. I can take a stab at it. > >> > >> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Dylan Millikin > <dylan.milli...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> > Maybe working on referencing these pages via perhaps a blog post from > > someone would be cool. Something along the lines of "Creating a graph db > > > with Tinkerpop" or some other variation that may get good hit results in > a > > google search. > > > > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Stephen Mallette > <spmalle...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > We've seen a lot of new graphs come out that don't do TinkerPop from > the > > > start. Perhaps they make a conscious decision not to - i dunno. I > just > > > wonder if part of the problem is the provider docs for doing an > > > implementation: > > > > > > <http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/3.2.0-incubating/dev/provider/> > > > > > > are they easy enough to find? do folks understand them and what it > means > > to > > > be tinkerpop-enabled? the docs could probably be improved - any > graph > > > providers out there want to take a stab at it? in some ways your > external > > > experience at implementing might be helpful in improving them. > > > > > > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Marko Rodriguez > <okramma...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > See https://github.com/haifengl/unicorn > > > > > > > > They say they support a "Gremlin-like API." It would be really > cool if > > > > they just implemented TinkerPop's Graph API. Perhaps someone > feels like > > > > creating a ticket at their main repo explaining how to go > about > > > supporting > > > > TinkerPop? Or, even better, providing them a PR! > > > > > > > > https://github.com/adplabs/unicorn > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > Marko. > > > > > > > > <http://markorodriguez.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
