[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-963?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
stephen mallette updated TINKERPOP-963: --------------------------------------- Fix Version/s: (was: 3.2.7) > SubgraphTraversalAnalyzer to determine what is really required from a > traversal. > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: TINKERPOP-963 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-963 > Project: TinkerPop > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: process > Affects Versions: 3.1.0-incubating > Reporter: Marko A. Rodriguez > Assignee: Marko A. Rodriguez > > This idea is dependent on the work in TINKERPOP3-962 being complete. > The idea is that there should be a {{SubgraphTraversalAnalyzer}}-type step > that for a {{traversal}} returns a > {{Pair<Traversal<Vertex,Vertex>,Traversal<Edge,Edge>>}} that defines two > "filters" that contain the subgraph that the traversal will execute in. > For instance. > {code} > g.V().hasLabel("person").out("pets").hasLabel("dog") > {code} > {{SubgraphTraversalAnalyzer}} would return > {code} > Pair.with( > hasLabel("person","dog"), > hasLabel("pets")) > {code} > The difficulty with this ticket is that TinkerPop does NOT make any > assumptions about a schema. For instance, if the user did this: > {code} > g.V().hasLabel("person").out("pets") > {code} > Then the best we could return is: > {code} > Pair.with( > identity(), > hasLabel("pets")) > {code} > cc/ [~mbroecheler] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)